!** 


& 


m 


-j 


■v.-  ,•; 


I 


% 


i£>  * 


PERKINS  LIBRARY 

Duke   University 


Kare  Dooks 


^>w  <?     $£jf  y. '^fu:>^ 


-/   '. 


\ 


SERIES  OF  LETTERS, 


IN    DEFENCE    OF 


DIVINE  REVELATION 

IN  REPLY  TO 


OF  THE  SAME. 


BY  HOSEA  BALLOU, 

Pastor  of  the  Second  Universalis!  Society  in  Boston 


TO  WHICH  IS  ADDED, 


A  RELIGIOUS  CORRESPONDENCE, 


BETWEEN 


THE  REV.   HOSEA  BALLOU,  AND  THE  REV.  DR.  JOSEPH  BUCKMINSTEK 

AND  REV.  JOSEPH  WALTON,  PASTORS  OF  CONGREGATIONAL 

CHURCHES  IN  PORTSMOUTH,  N.  H. 


BOSTON: 

PRINTED  AND    PUBLISHED    BY  HEXRY    BOWEN,    CONGRESS'S TRSTCT 

1820. 


District  of  Massachusetts,  to  wit  : 

District  ClerVs  Office. 

Be  it  remembered,  that  on  the  twenty-fifth  day  of  July,  A.  D. 
1820,  in  the  forty-fifth  year  of  the  Independence  of  the  United  States 
of  America,  HENRY  BO  WEN,  of  the  said  district,  has  deposited  in 
this  office,  the  title  of  a  book,  the  right  whereof  he  claims  as  Propri- 
etor  in  the  words  following,  to  wit : 

"  A  Series  of  Letters,  in  defence  of  Divine  Revelation  ;  in  reply 
to  Rev.  Abner  Kneeland's  Serious  Inquiry  into  the  authenticity  of 
the  same.  By  Hosea  Ballou,  Pastor  of  the  Second  Universalist 
Society  in  Boston.  To  which  is  added,  a  Religious  Correspondence, 
between  the  Rev.  Hosea  Ballou,  and  the  Rev.  Dr.  Joseph  Buckmin- 
»ter,  and  Rev.  Joseph  Walton,  Pastors  of  Congregational  Churches 
in  Portsmouth,  N.  H." 

In  conformity  to  the  Act  of  the  Congress  of  the  United  States,  en- 
titled, "  An  Act  for  the  Encouragement  of  Learning,  by  securing 
the  Copies  of  Maps,  Charts  and  Books,  to  the  Authors  and  Proprie- 
tors of  such  Copies,  during  the  times  therein  mentioned  :17  and  also 
to  mi  Act  entitled,  "  An  Act  supplementary  to  an  Act,  entitled,  an 
AaA  for  the  Encouragement  of  Learning,  by  securing  the  Copies  of 
Maps,  Charts  and  Books,  to  the  Authors  and  Proprietors  of  such 
Copies  during  the  times  therein  mentioned  ;  and  extending  the  ben- 
efit! thereof  to  the  Arts  of  Designing,  Engraving,  and  Etching  Histo- 
rical, and  other  Prints." 

JOHN  W.  DAVIS,  Clerk  of  the  District  of 
Massachusetts 


University  Library 

TO  THE  READER. 

SOME  few  suggestions  respecting  the  following  Contro- 
versy are  thought  necessary  in  order  to  inform  the  reader 
how  it  was  first  introduced,  the  motives  which  led  to  it,  and 
those  which  induced  to  its  being  published  to  the  world. 

We  learn  from  the  Rev.  Mr.  Kneeland,  that  having  at 
different  times  been  exercised  in  his  mind  with  serious  doubts 
respecting  the  authenticity  of  the  Scriptures,  and  the  system 
of  Divine  Revelation,  recorded  in  them,  he  was  induced  to 
solicit  a  correspondence  with  the  Rev.  Mr.  Ballou  on  the 
subject.  That,  in  order  to  render  the  controversy  the  more 
interesting,  by  calling  into  action  the  energies  of  mind,  and 
by  directing  the  correspondence  to  definite  purposes,  he 
assumed  the  character  of  a  real  opponent,  determining  to 
maintain  the  opposition,  in  all  its  forms,  until  reduced,  by 
necessity,  to  yield  to  successful  arguments  directed  against 
it.  It  was  with  great  reluctance  that  the  advocate  for  the 
christian  religion,  in  this  controversy,  consented  to  under- 
take a  work  of  this  nature  ;  not,  however,  because  he  es- 
teemed it  unnecessary,  or  because  he  entertained  any  doubts 
with  regard  to  the  defensibility  of  revelation,  but,  as  he 
contends,  on  account  of  the  want  of  abilities  and  means  to 
do  the  subject  justice.  His  opponent,  however,  being  a 
familiar  acquaintance  and  friend,  as  well  as  a  preacher  in 
the  same  profession  of  faith  with  himself,  having  led  him  to 
believe  that  a  labour  of  this  kind  was  called  for  by  the  most 
sacred  obligations  of  brother  to  brother,  he  was  induced  to 
render  what  assistance  was  in  his  power,  without  infringing 
too  much  on  other  important  duties  in  which  he  was  almost 
constantly  engaged. 

When  the  controversy  closed,  Mr.  Kneeland  felt  such  an 
entire  satisfaction  in  his  own  mind,  that  the  objections  which 
he  had  stated  were  fairly  answered,  and  the  validity  of  the 
Scriptures  vindicated,  that  he  was  led  to  believe  that  to  pub- 
lish the  correspondence  would  be  of  service  to  the  cause  of 
Christ.  He  therefore  obtained  leave  of  his  correspondent, 
and  carried  the  manuscripts  to  the  westwajd,  where  he 

368087 


iv  To  the  Reader. 

offered  proposals  for  the  work,  nbd  obtained  a  namber  of  sub- 
scribers ;  but  being  called  to  remove  to  Philadelphia,  he  was 
under  the  necessity  of  postponing  the  publication  for  aseason. 
The  publisher  having  obtained  some  knowledge  of  this  cor- 
respondence, and  being  informed  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Kneeland 
that  the  arguments  which  it  contains  were,  in  his  opinion, 
calculated  to  strengthen  the  believer,  as  well  as  confirm  the 
doubting,  he  negociated  for  the  manuscripts  and  now  pre- 
sents the  work  to  the  public,  entertaining  a  hope  that  it  may 
serve  the  interest  of  Christianity,  and  promote  a  respect 
and  veneration  for  the  sacred  writings. 

The  letters  which  passed  between  Mr.  Ballou  and  two 
respectable  clergymen  in  the  town  of  Portsmouth,  N.  H. 
were  some  years  since  published  in  VTermont;  but  several 
circumstances  rendered  it  proper  that  this  work  should  be 
reprinted.  Besides  its  being  nearly  or  quite  out  of  print, 
the  first  edition  was  on  an  inferior  paper,  the  work  badly 
executed,  and  a  number  of  errors  were  discovered. 

To  those  who  believe  in  the  universality  of  divine  good- 
ness, the  publisher  feels  confident  the  following  ivork  will 
be  received  and  read  with  no  small  satisfaction.  And  a 
hope  is  entertained  that  it  may  be  the  means  of  enlighten- 
ing some,  who  though  they  possess  the  spirit  of  universal 
love  and  benevolence,  have  not  the  felicity  of  believing  i» 
the  divine  goodness  to  the  extent  of  their  own  desires. 

H.  BOWEN\ 


A  SERIES  OF  LETTERS,  *yc. 


EXTRACTS  No.  I. 

[The  first  letter  of  the  objector  was  designed  merely  as  an  Introduc- 
tion, inviting  Mr.  B.  to  the  investigation  of  the  important  subject  of 
moral  truth,  or  more  particularly  the  truth  of  divine  revelation.  The 
following  are  extracts.] 

"The  thought  has  long  since  occurred  to  me  that  the 
present  age  is  an  age  of  discovery  and  improvement.  The 
human  mind  seems  to  be  developing  its  powers  in  a  most 
wonderful  manner  ;  new  inventions,  new  discoveries,  and 
new  theories  are  the  fruits  of  new  experiments  ;  while  many 
are  improving  upon  theories  and  subjects  already  existing. 
Thus  human  nature  seems  to  be  almost  prepared  to  make  a 
regular  advance  in  moral  as  well  as  scientific  truth. 

"  However  pleasing  this  must  be  to  every  real  lover  to 
the  arts  and  sciences,  yet  there  seems  to  be  a  disposition  (at 
least,  as  it  respects  all  moral  and  religious  subjects)  to  chain 
down  the  human  mind  to  its  present  attainments,  and  thereby 
prevent  all  further  improvement.  O  how  long  will  it  be 
before  common  sense  shall  burst  this  bubble  of  fanaticism, 
and  all  its  mists  become  evaporated  and  removed  by  the  rays 
of  simple  and  native  truth  ?  Then  shall  man  know  for  him- 
self that,  under  God,  all  his  powers  and  faculties  are  as  free 
as  the  element  he  breathes.  Free  to  think,  free  to  speak, 
and  free  to  act  as  reason  and  good  sense  shall  dictate.  Sup- 
posing that  you  and  I  should  think  of  setting  an  example  for 
others,  by  trying  to  throw  off  the  prejudices  of  a  false  educa- 
tion, so  far  as  we  have  been  thus  entangled,  and  search  for 
the  truth  within  us,  as  the  foundation  of  all  truth  which  ma- 
terially concerns  us  to  know.  Who,  except  our  own  con- 
sciences, will  ever  call  us  to  an  account  for  so  doing  ? 

M  It  gives  me  pain  when  I  see  what  time  and  money,  what 
labour  and  toil  have  been  expended,  and  are  still  expending, 
in  plodding  over,  as  it  were  an  old  dead  letter ;  to  learn  lan- 
guages which  exist  no  where  only  on  paper,  barely  for  the 
sake  of  reading  the  opinions  of  other  men,  in  other  times; 

368087 


6  SERIES   OF    LETTERS. 

men  who  lived  in  other  ages  of  the  world,  and  under  verv 
different  circumstances  from  ourselves  ;  whose  opinions,  all 
of  which  are  worth  preserving,  might  be  given  in  our  own 
language,  so  as  to  answer  every  purpose  which  can  be  an- 
swered by  them,  at  less  than  a  hundredth  part  of  the  expense 
it  necessarily  requires  to  obtain  a  competent  knowledge  of 
those  languages  in  which  almost  every  thing,  supposed  to  be 
valuable,  has  been  originally  written.  And  after  all,  the 
truth,  or  falsity,  of  every  proposition  must  depend  on  the 
truth  or  falsity  of  the  principles  embraced  in  it;  and  not  on 
the  language  in  which  it  was  originally  written. 

"  If  the  Greek  and  Hebrew  languages  be  any  security 
against  things  being  uttered  or  written  falsely  in  those  lan- 
guages, I  should  not  only  think  it  important  to  learn  them, 
but  to  adopt  them,  if  possible,  as  our  vernacular  tongue. — 
But  as  I  believe  none  will  contend  for  this,  I  should  like  to 
be  informed  of  what  possible  service  it  can  be  to  an  Ameri- 
can to  learn  either  of  those  languages  ?  Is  it  not  a  fact,  that 
every  natural  as  well  as  moral  truth  may  be  fully  unfolded 
to  the  understanding  without  them  ?  This  will  lead  the  way 
to  one  of  the  principal  subjects  which  I  mean  to  discuss.  It 
may  be  said,  that  the  holy  scriptures  were  originally  written 
in  Greek  and  Hebrew :  viz.  the  bible,  which  contains  a  revel- 
ation of  the  will  of  God  concerning  the  duty,  interest,  and 
final  destination  of  mankind.  This,  if  admitted,  gives  the 
Greek  and  Hebrew  languages  an  importance  that  nothing 
else  could.  Hence  the  importance  of  preserving  the  Greek 
and  Hebrew  languages,  without  which,  religion  could  not 
be  preserved  in  its  purity.  And  as  all  have  not  an  opportu- 
nity of  attaining  to  a  knowledge  of  those  languages,  it  is  the 
more  necessary  that  some  should,  lest  the  knowledge  of  lan- 
guages, on  which  so  much  is  supposed  to  depend,  should  be 
lost  to  the  world. 

u  If  I  understand  the  above  proposition,  it  seems  to  be 
this:  The  only  revelation  of  God  to  man,  which  was  ever 
recorded  on  either  vellum  or  paper,  was  written  partly  in 
Greek  and  partly  in  Hebrew ;  hence,  the  revealed  will  of 
God  cannot  be  known  only  through  the  medium  of  those  lan- 
guages. If  the  truth  of  all  this  can  be  made  to  appear,  I 
should  find  no  difficulty  in  admitting  all  the  consequences 
which  must  result  from  such  premises.  It  appears  a  little 
extraordinary,  however,  to  my  understanding,  and  not  a 
very  little  neither,  that  God  should  make  a  revelation  of  his 
will  in  one  age,  and  not  in  another ;  to  one  nation,  and  not  to 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  / 

another;  or  that  he  should  make  a  revelation  in  one  language, 
and  not  in  another  !  If  a  special  revelation  was  ever  neces- 
sary at  all,  it  is  difficult  for  me  to  see  why  it  was  not  equally 
necessary  in  all  ages  of  the  world,  to  all  the  nations  of  th? 
earth,  and  in  all  languages  ever  spoken  by  man. 

"  How  sweet  is  truth  to  the  understanding  !  And,  when 
spoken  in  a  language  every  word  of  which  is  familiar,  how 
harmonious  it  sounds  to  the  ear  by  which  the  sentiments  find 
their  way  to  the  heart! 

M  When  God  speaks  to  the  inward  man  there  is  no  need 
of  going  to  Lexicons,  Dictionaries,  and  Commentaries  to 
know  what  he  means.  I  would  not  complain,  however,  even 
of  this  method  to  ascertain  truth,  if  I  could  be  so  happy  as 
always  to  come  away  satisfied.  But  to  consider  a  subject  on 
which  much  is  supposed  to  depend,  and,  desiring  if  possible 
to  obtain  the  truth,  plod  through  the  dark  mists  occasioned  by 
the  ambiguity  and  contradiction  of  authors,  and  after  all,  be 
obliged  to  dismiss  the  subject  as  much  in  the  dark  as  it  was 
found,  is  too  insupportable  to  be  confided  in  as  the  only  road 
to  moral  truth. 

"  Let  it  not  be  supposed  however,  that  I  mean  to  insinuate 
that  the  bible  contains  no  moral  truth  ;  so  far  from  this,  I 
conceive  it  to  be  replete  with  moral  instruction  ;  that  is  to 
say,  there  are  excellent  moral  maxims  in  the  bible  ;  but  re- 
specting these  there  is  neither  ambiguity  nor  obscurity ;  and 
probably  for  this  plain  reason,  because  there  seems  to  be  no 
dispute  about  them.  These  however  are  none  the  more 
true  for  being  written,  and  would  have  been  equally  true  if 
found  in  any  other  book,  and  at  the  same  time  not  found  in 
the  bible.  Truth  is  truth  wherever  found,  and  all  moral 
truth,  as  well  as  natural,  must  be  eternal  in  its  nature. 

"Much  of  the.  bible  however,  is  merely  historical;  and 
whether  most  of  the  things  there  related  are  either  true  or 
not,  I  do  not  see  any  connexion  they  either  have,  or  can 
have,  with  either  my  present  or  future  happiness.  As  for 
instance,  I  do  not  see  how  my  happiness  is  at  all  connected 
with  the  story  of  Daniel's  being  cast  into  the  den  of  lions — 
or  of  Jonah's  being  swallowed  by  a  fish  !  any  more  than  it  is 
with  the  story  of  Remus  and  Romulus'  being  nursed  by  a 
she  wolf!  And  if  not.  these  things  are  matters  of  total  in- 
difference ;  yea,  as  much  so  as  the  extraordinary,  and.  were 
it  not  for  comparing  tilings  supposed  to  be  sacred  with  pro- 
fane, 1  would  say,  ridiculous  stories  in  the  heathen  mytholo- 
gy.    If  it  should  be  contended  that   the  facts  recorded  "in 


8  SERIES   OF    LETTERS.' 

sacred  history  are  necessary  to  prove  the  power  and  provi- 
dence of  God  towards  his  children,  it  may  be  answered  that 
those  in  profane  history,  if  true,  are  equally  conclusive.  If 
it  should  be  said  that  we  cannot  place  the  same  confidence 
in  profane  history  as  in  sacred,  it  brings  me  to  the  very- sub- 
ject of  my  inquiry — viz. 

"  If  the  things  stated  in  the  bible  are  no  more  reasonable 
than  those  in  profane  history,  what  reason  have  we  to  believe 
these  any  more  than  those  ?  Must  not  our  own  reason  finally 
determine  for  ourselves  whether  or  not  either  be  true  ? 
And  if  we  are  in  no  sense  interested  in  the  truth  or  falsity  of 
those  accounts  why  need  we  trouble  ourselves  about  them  ? 
"  Yours,  &c.  A.  KNEELAND." 


LETTER  I. 

Much  esteemed  friend, — The  desire  you  express  of  at- 
tempting those  researches  which  seem  necessary  to  pro- 
mote the  further  attainment  of  moral  truth,  is  appreciated  as 
truly  laudable  ;  and  did  I  feel  myself  adequate  to  your  wishes, 
I  should  enjoy  a  peculiar  felicity  in  complying  with  your  re- 
quest. But  so  far  from  this  I  am  very  sensible  that  the  mag- 
nitude of  the  general  subject  which  you  have  introduced, 
requires  to  be  investigated  by  abilities  far  superior  to  those 
possessed  by  me,  and  demands  a  tribute  from  resources  not 
within  my  possession.  However,  as  you  have  imposed  an 
obligation  on  me  by  the  communication  which  is  here  ac- 
knowledged, I  will  make  a  feeble  attempt  to  suggest  a  few 
reflections  relative  to  the  main  subjects  of  your  epistle, 
which  if  they  do  nothing  more,  will  return  merited  acknowl- 
edgements and  plead  the  necessity  of  calling  to  your  assist- 
ance abilities  more  promising. 

While  I  view  the  advances  which  are  making  in  the 
knowledge  of  the  arts  and  sciences,  with  the  pleasure  of 
which  you  speak,  I  am  apprehensive  that  the  propensity 
M  to  chain  down  the  human  mind  to  its  present  attainments, 
and  thereby  prevent  all  further  improvements,"  relative  to 
moral  truth,  may  have  its  rise  in  a  principle,  which,  so  far 
from  being  inimical  to  man,  is,  in  its  general  tendency,  incal- 
culably beneficial.  No  desire  is  entertained  to  justify  all 
the  zeal  and  all  the  means  which  are  employed  to  prevent 
the  free  exercise  of  the  human  mind,  in  its  researches  after 
divine   knowledge,  and  to  retard  the   influx  of  that  light 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  9 

which  would  prove  unfavourahle  to  doctrines  which  have 
little  more  than  prescription  for  their  support ;  hut  it  seems 
reasonable  to  make  a  proper  distinction  between  what  may 
be  called  a  salutary  principle  in  the  human  mind,  and  a 
wrong  application  or  an  erroneous  indulgence  of  it.  The 
principle  referred  to,  inclines  us  not  only  to  hold  in  the  high- 
est veneration  any  improvements  which  we  have  made,  but 
also  to  retain  snch  acquisitions  in  their  purity.  Now  it  is 
believed  that  what  you  complain  of,  has  its  rise  from  the 
foregoing  causes,  and  is  nothing  more  than  a  wrong  or  an  er- 
roneous indulgence  of  a  natural  desire  which  in  its  general 
tendency  is  advantageous.  Nothing  is  more  incident  to  man, 
than  to  misapply  his  desires,  and  to  overate  his  reasonable 
duty.  But  it  is  at  the  same  time  believed  thr.t  a  remedy  of 
such  defects  which  should  consist  in  the  destruction  of  those 
principles  which  are  improperly  acted  on,  would  be  wefse 
than  the  disorder.  And  now  the  thought  strikes  me,  that 
the  way  by  which  we  account  for  the  improprieties  which 
have  just  been  traced  up  to  their  causes,  will  as  charitably 
account  for  what  seems  to  incite  you  to  aim  a  fatal  stroke  at 
a  fabric  which  has  its  foundation  in  the  immovable  principles 
of  our  moral  nature,  and  which,  though  through  the  wan- 
derings of  the  human  mind,  may  have  not  a  little  hay,  wood 
and  stubble,  yet  possess  too  much  gold,  silver  and  precious 
stones,  to  be  forsaken  as  a  pile  of  rubbish. 

It  gives  you  u  pain  to  see  what  time  and  money,  what  la- 
bour and  toil  have  been  expended  and  are  still  expending  in 
plodding  over  as  it  were  an  old  dead  letter;  to  learn  lan- 
guages which  exist  no  where  only  on  paper,  barely  for  the 
sake  of  reading  the  opinions  of  other  men  who  lived  in  other 
times,"  &c.  But  you  allow  that  all  this  would  be  necessary 
if  "  the  only  revelation  of  God  to  man,  which  was  ever  re- 
corded on  vellum  or  paper  was  written  partly  in  Greek  and 
partly  in  Hebrew,"  and  that  "  the  will  of  God  cannot  be 
known  only  through  the  medium  of  those  languages."  In 
this  last  particular,  you  express  what  appears  very  reason- 
able, and  I  presume  you  would  be  willing  to  consent  to  all 
this  expense  and  toil,  even  if  the  proposition  were  to  lose 
part  of  its  importance,  and  it  were  only  contended  that  God 
had  actually  made  a  revelation  to  man,  which  was  written 
originally  partly  in  Greek  and  partly  in  the  Hebrew,  with- 
out saying  that  he  has  never  caused  a  revelation  to  be  writ- 
ten originally  in  any  other  language. 


10  SERIES   OF   LETTERS. 

A  revelation  from  God,  if  it  were  written  only  in  the  He- 
brew or  Greek,  would  be  considered  of  sufficient  value  to 
recompence  the  labour  of  learning  the  language.  But  you 
contend  that  this  revelation,  if  real,  can  be  translated  into 
English,  but  yew  must  allow  that  to  translate  it,  the  original 
must  be  learnedjirst.  Will  you  say,  that  after  the  transla- 
tion is  once  made,  the  original  is  of  no  more  use  ?  How  then 
are  future  ages  to  determine  whether  they  have  not  been 
imposed  on  ?  Suppose  no  person  of  the  present  age  under- 
stood the  languages  in  which  the  scriptures  were  first  writ- 
ten, surely  in  this  case,  those  languages  would  be  lost  be- 
yond recovery.  Suppose  then  it  should  be  doubted  whether 
our  bible  was  not  a  fabrication,  written  originally  not  in  He- 
brew nor  in  Greek,  but  in  some  more  modern  language,  how 
could  the  suggestion  be  refuted  ? 

\ou  appear  to  be  perplexed  with  the  disagreement  of 
authors,  as  commentators,  and  I  presume,  critics  on  the  origi- 
nal text ;  you  speak  on  this  subject,  as  if  it  were  too  much 
for  patience  to  endure.  Now,  dear  brother,  I  confess  I  feel 
very  differently  on  this  subject.  I  feel  a  devout,  a  religious 
gratitude  to  him  whose  wisdom  is  foolishness  in  the  sight  of 
too  many  of  my  fellow  creatures.  I  view  the  very  thing  of 
which  you  complain,  as  that  fire  and  crucible  which  have 
preserved  the  written  testimony  from  any  considerable  cor- 
ruptions. This  is  a  subject  on  which  volumes  might  be  writ- 
ten to  the  instruction  and  edification  of  the  disciples  of 
iesus. 

The  queries  which  you  state  concerning  a  revelation's  be- 
ing made  in  one  age  and  not  in  another,  in  one  nation  and 
not  in  another,  in  one  language,  and  not  in  another,  if  a  spe- 
cial revelation  were  necessary,  &c.  are  not  considered  as 
very  weighty  objections  to  the  doctrine  of  the  scriptures. 
1  believe  you  will  allow  that  our  species  of  being  commenc- 
ed on  this  earth  in  a  different  way  than  that  by  which  it  has 
been  continued.  But  why  should  the  Creator,  create  a  man 
and  a  woman  at  one  time,  and  not  at  aJi  times  when  he  sees 
fit  to  multiply  his  rational  creatures  ?  It  is  not  only  evident 
that  God  saw  that  the  laws  of  procreation  were  sufficient  to 
perpetuate  man,  and  to  multiply  his  rational  offspring,  but 
it  is  likewise  apparent  that  the  connexions,  relations,  and 
harmonies  of  society  are  principally  built  on  this  law.  So 
1  humbly  conceive,  that  the  continuance  and  propagation  of 
a  divine  revelation  are  even  as  well  secured  by  the  means 
which  have  been  employed  for  that  purpose,   as  if  the 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  11 

Almighty  had  in  every  age,  and  in  every  country  made  such 
a  revelation,  and  moreover,  it  is  likewise  apparent,  that  the 
mental  labours  necessary  in  obtaining  a  knowledge  of  these 
divine  things  greatly  contribute  to  their  enjoyment,  and  ren- 
der the  christian  fellowship,  faith  and  hope  peculiarly  inter- 
esting and  edifying.  Here  again  I  can  only  suggest  a  sub- 
ject on  which  voluminous  writings  might  be  profitable. 

You  seem  to  entertain  an  idea  that  the  historical  part  of 
the  bible  can  be  "of  no  importance  to  you,  as  it  has  no  con- 
nexion with  your  present  or  future  happiness.  You  instance 
the  particulars  of  Daniel's  being  cast  into  the  den  of  lions, 
and  Jonah's  being  swallowed  by  the  fish,  &c.  As  these  are 
circumstances  in  the  history  of  that  nation  which  continues  a 
comment  on,  and  an  evidence  of  prophesy,  they  are  too  in- 
teresting to  be  dispensed  with.  If  you  could  produce  the 
decree  of  a  powerful  monarch,  sent  into  all  parts  of  his  do- 
minions, which  was  occasioned  by  **  Remus  and  Romulus'  be- 
ing nursed  by  a  she  wolf,"  the  case  would  bear  some  marks 
of  a  parallel.  Profane  authors  advert  to  such  events  as 
sufficient  support  of  any  fact  which  they  endeavor  to  main- 
tain. 

I  come  now  to  your  main  object.  Speaking  in  regard  to 
the  credibility  of  what  is  written  by  profane  authors,  and  of 
that  which  is  recorded  in  the  scriptures,  you  ask— "  Must 
not  our  own  reason  finally  determine  for  ourselves  whether 
or  not  either  be  true  ?"  To  this  I  reply  in  the  affirmative  ; 
but  then  reason  must  have  its  means  and  its  evidences.  For^ 
instance,  I  read  of  the  death  and  resurrection  of  the  man 
Christ  Jesus,  I  consider  this  vastly  important  event  as  it 
stands  in  connexion  with  the  evidences  which  support  it, 
aud  reason  is  the  eye  with  which  I  examine  these  evidences, 
and  when  reason  is  constrained  to  say  all  these  circumstances 
could  never  have  existed  unless  the  fact  were  true,  it  is  then 
I  am  a  believer  in  Jesus.  But  if  I  must  consider  the  resur- 
rection disconnected  from  the  evidence,  reason  has  nothing 
to  do  with  it.  Please  to  accept  these  hasty  remarks',  not  as 
an  answer,  but  as  suggestions  which  may  lead  to  one,  and  as 
a  testimony  of  my  respect  and  esteem. 

Yours,  &c.  H.  BALLOU 


EXTRACTS  No.  II. 

"  A  revelation  from  God,  let  it  be  made  in  any  language 
whatever,  I  am  very  ready  to  admit,  must  be  considered  o£ 


12  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

sufficient  importance,  not  only  to  justify  all  reasonable  pains 
to  preserve  it,  but  also  to  hand  it  down  in  its  original  purity 
to  posterity.  We  owe  it,  not  only  in  gratitude  to  the  giver, 
but  we  owe  it  in  justice  to  future  generations,  who  would 
nave  just  occasion  to  reproach  us,  if  they  could  know  that  so 
valuable  a  treasure  was  put  into  our  hands,  which  might 
have  been  handed  down  to  them,  and  that  we  suffered  it  to 
perish  through  what  must  be  termed  by  them,  a  criminal 
neglect. 

M  You  will  perceive,  therefore,  that  I  had  no  particular  al- 
lusion to  a  revelation  from  God,  when  I  spoke  of  translating 
the  most  valuable  of  ancient  writings  into  English.  No  one 
will  pretend  that  such  translations  could  not  be  made  suffi- 
ciently accurate  to  answer  all  the  purposes,  either  of  history 
or  of  the  useful  arts.  It  is  admitted  that  the  case  is  quite  dif- 
ferent, if  there  be  a  mystery  in  these  writings,  the  truth  of 
which  depends  on  literary  criticism, or  grammatical  exactness; 
but  if  these  writings  are  nothing  more  than  the  bare  opin- 
ions and  discoveries  of  men,  and  of  men  too,  as  liable  to  error 
as  ourselves,  and  if  no  one  was  to  view  them  in  a  different 
light,  I  apprehend  there  would  be  all  the  confidence  placed 
in  a  translation,  that  could  with  propriety  be  placed  in  the 
original  itself.  For,  after  all,  we  should  try  the  facts  by 
other  corroborating  testimony  ;  and  as  to  the  opinions,  we 
should  judge  of  them  only  by  the  reasonableness  and  fitness 
of  things.  Although  I  have  heard  it  objected  to  the  trans- 
lation of  Seneca 's  Morals*  that  much  of  the  beauty  of  the  style 
is  lost  in  the  translation,  yet  I  never  heard  it  pretended  but 
thai  the  ideas  are  sufficiently  clear  ;  but  the  case  would  have 
been  quite  different  if  mankind  had  ever  been  taught  to  be- 
lieve that  their  final  and  eternal  salvation  depended  in  the 
least  degree  on  an  exact  observance  of  those  moral  princi- 
ples. And  I  very  much  question  whether  there  ever  has 
been  a  translation  of  the  bible,  or  even  of  any  other  work, 
in  which  the  most  important  facts  were  not  sufficiently  ap- 
parent. If  the  fact  can  be  supposed  otherwise,  it  must  be 
admitted  that,  comparatively  speaking,  but  very  few  people 
at  the  present  day  are  benefited  by  a  revelation  from  God. 
For  the  great  mass  of  mankind  have  to  receive  the  bible  al- 
together on  the  credit  of  others.  And  who  are  their  guides 
in  this  case  ?  Answer,  Translators  and  Commentators  !  And 
as  these  men  made  no  pretentions  to  inspiration,  unless  the 
translation  is  substantially correct,  as  to  matters  of  fact,  how 
are  thecommom  people  benefited  by  a  revelation  from  God  ?'1 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  13 

[Having  adverted  to  the  previous  studies  in  the  dead  languages, 
which  are  required  before  an  admittance  can  be  obtained  in  our  com- 
mon colleges,  the  objector  proceeds.] 

u  But  I  am  off  from  my  main  subject.  I  will  now  endeav- 
our to  call  up  all  my  mental  faculties,  seriously  to  attend  to 
a  revelation  from  God.  The  idea  suggested  in  these  words  is 
beyond  all  expression  awfully  sublime.  Yea,  not  even  the 
bursting  of  Vesuvius,  not  the  aurora-borealis,  not  the  forked 
lightning,  not  the  tremendons  earthquake,  no,  nor  yet  the 
greatest  phenomenon  in  nature,  of  which  the  human  mind  can 
onceive,  can  afford  such  ideas  of  the  truly  sublime,  as  the 
truth,  if  it  could  be  realized,  of  the  above  proposition.  Let 
me  not  hastily  reject  without  serious  reflection,  that,  which 
of  all  truths,  must  be  the  most  important.  O  help  me,  my 
dear  friend,  help  me  also,  O  thou  who  art  the  only  source  of 
truth,  thoroughly  to  investigate  this  momentous  subject! 
But  let  me  not  be  deceived.  Let  me  not  receive  for  truth, 
that  which  cannot  be  made  sufficiently  clear  to  my  under- 
standing. There  can  be  no  more  harm  in  doubting,  than  in 
believing,  where  the  evidence  is  not  clear.  All  that  which 
appertains  to  eternal  truth  will  remain,  whether  I  now  see 
it  or  not ;  and  that  which  does  not  appertain  to  it  will  never 
be  realized,  although  1  may  now  be  made  to  believe  it. 
There  can  be  no  harm,  therefore,  in  investigating  this  sub- 
ject in  the  same  way  and  on  the  same  principles,  as  I  would 
investigate  all  subjects.  Although  I  cannot  expect  to  offer 
any  thing  very  new,  yet  I  am  disposed  to  examine  the  subject 
for  myself,  and  that  too,  in  my  own  way.  I  shall  quote  no 
authors,  for  I  have  not  read  but  few  on  this  subject  which 
meet  my  approbation,  and  even  them  are  not  now  by  me. 
My  own  understanding  is  the  only  author  to  which  1  shall 
appeal.  If  that  can  be  cleared  of  the  difficulties  which  have 
fallen  in  its  way,  I  am  willing,  yea  I  wish,  still  to  believe  in 
divine  revelation. 

M  Here  let  me  close  my  preamble,  which  is  already  made 
too  lengthy,   and  come  immediately  to  discourse  c  on  divine 

REVELATION.' 

u  In  order  to  know  the  truth  er  falsity  of  any  proposition, 
we  must  in  the  first  place  und.  rstand  the  terms  by  which 
the  proposition  is  made  ;  for  without  such  previous  knowl- 
edge, we  cannot  know  what  is  mean'  either  a>  be  affirmed 
or  denied.  By  divine  revelation,  I  understand  s  a  communi- 
cation of  sacred  truth,'  made  directly  from  God  to  man.  In 
order  for  any  man  to  know  that  a  revelation  his  been  made 


14  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

to  him  from  God,  it  must  be  made  in  such  a  way,  that  neither 
his  perception,  nor  his  judgment  or  understanding-,  can  pos- 
sibly be  mistaken.  For,  as  man  by  his  reason  alcne.  never 
could  have  foreseen  that  a  revelation  would  be  made,  there- 
fore, unless  it  should  have  been  made  in  such  a  way  that  he 
could  not  have  been  deceived,  a  rational  man  would  be  more 
likely  to  conclude  that  he  was  deceived,  than  that,  which  to 
him  would  seem  more  unlikely,  should  be  true.  It  seems, 
therefore,  that  a  revelation  from  God.  to  all  our  conceptions 
of  the  fact,  must  be  considered,  if  existing  at  all,  as  some- 
thing- supernatural ;  otherwise  it  could  be  nothing  more  than 
discovery,  or  a  fortuitous  event.  Hence  a  revelation  from 
God,  however  true,  and  however  clear,  to  the  person  or  per- 
sons to  whom  it  was  first  communicated,  must  lose  its  evi- 
dence, in  some  degree,  when  it  comes  to  be  communicated 
by  him  or  them  to  others ;  for,  being  communicated  to 
others,  although  it  is  still  revelation,  yet  not  being  received 
immediately  from  God,  it  cannot  be  accompanied  with  the 
same  evidence  which  it  was  in  the  first  place ;  therefore,  to 
say  the  most  of  it,  it  is  nothing  more  than  the  history  of  a 
revelation.  It  is  made  no  less  true  than  it  was  before  ;  but 
its  truth  now  rests  upon  very  different  testimony. 

u  The  principles  in  nature  all  existed,  before  they  were 
discovered  by  man.  Their  being  discovered,  neither  chang- 
ed their  nature,  nor  made  them  any  more  true.  What  con- 
sternation a  total  eclipse  of  the  sun,  or  of  the  moon  must 
have  produced,  before  their  cause  was  known?  They  are 
now  viewed,  especially  that  of  the  latter,  among  the  com- 
mon occurrences  of  nature.  Yea,  many  of  the  operations 
of  nature,  which  are  now  perfectly  understood  by  chymists, 
could  they  be  viewed  by  the  common  people,  who  know  not 
their  causes,they  would  be  inclined  to  believe  they  were  super- 
natural. At  least,  it  would  not  be  difficult  to  make  them 
believe  so,  especially  when  this  knowledge  was  confined  to 
a  few,  and  those  few  were  so  disposed.  These  remarks  are 
not  designed  to  do  away  the  force  of  any  arguments  which 
may  be  founded  on  miracles  ;  for  this  is  no  proof  that  mira- 
cles may  not  exist;  but  then,  how  is  a  miracle  a  revelatioa 
of  any  thing  more  than  what  is  contained  in  the  miracle  it- 
self? This  is  what  I  cannot  see,  but  I  shall  have  occasion 
to  say  more  on  this  subject  hereafter.  It  will  be  needless 
for  me  to  object  to  the  inferences  drawn  from  miracles  until 
a  miracle  is  proven. 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  15 

M  If  a  man  absolutely  knows  something  of  which  I  am  ig- 
norant, and  informs  me  of  it,  it  makes  no  difference  to  me 
how  he  come  by  his  knowledge — it  is  revelation  to  me.  It 
may  not  be  divine  revelation  ;  but  supposing  it  is,  or  is  not, 
in  either  case,  how  am  I  to  believe  ?  Is  it  any  thing  that  will 
admit  of  mathematical  demonstration  ?  If  so,  I  shall  take  up 
with  nothing  short  of  being  convinced  in  this  way.  Is  it  any 
thing  which  he  has  discovered?  If  so,  he  must  give  me 
evidence  of  such  a  discovery.  Is  it  something  to  which  he 
was  an  eye  witness  ?  Then  the  truth  to  me,  depends  for  the 
present,  entirely  on  his  credibility.  I  must  be  convinced  in 
the  first  place  that  he  was  not  deceived  himself,  and  second- 
ly, that  he  has  no  motive  in  deceiving  me.  And  evidence 
equally  conclusive  must  accompany  the  truth  of  divine  rev- 
elation, or  it  ought  not,  nay  more,  it  cannot,  rationally  be 
believed.  But  supposing  that  I  am  convinced  of  the  truth, 
and  therefore  believe  ;  and  I  relate  the  same  to  a  third  per- 
son;  is  it  equally  revelation  to  him  as  it  was  to  me  ?  Yes, 
it  may  be  so  considered,  in  one  sense,  at  least,  for  it  informs 
him  of  something  of  which  he  was  before  ignorant,  as  much 
so  as  it  did  me,  but  then  the  truth  of  the  fact  does  not  rest 
with  him  on  equal  testimony,  and  therefore  he  is  more  ex- 
cusable if  he  does  not  believe.  If,  however,  he  can  believe 
all  that  I  believe,  and  in  addition  to  that,  believe  also  in  we, 
then,  and  not  till  then,  he  will  become  a  believer  in  the 
same  truth.  But  if  he  even  suspects  my  veracity,  it  weak- 
ens in  his  mind,  all  the  other  testimony  ;  and  though  he  may 
still  believe  in  the  main  proposition,  yet  he  believes  with 
less  strength  of  evidence. 

"  Here  a  very  important  question  arises  in  my  mind.  Is 
divine  revelation  something  that  rests  entirely  on  matters  of 
fact ;  or  is  the  most  essential  part,  which  concerns  us  to 
know,  a  mere  matter  of  opinion  ?  On  a  few  moments  of 
reflection,  however,  it  appears  that  this  can  hardly  admit  of 
a  question.  For  all  that  relates  to  a  future,  and  an  eternal 
state,  must  be  a  mere  matter  of  opinion  only  ;  and  the  facts 
recorded  in  the  scriptures  are  supposed  to  corroborate  and 
substantiate  those  opinions.  Now,  as  they  respect  matters 
of  fact,  I  believe  the  scriptures  are  substantial!}'  the  same  in 
all  versions,  and  in  all  languages  into  which  they  have  been 
translated.  And  if  so,  there  is  no  need  of  learning  the  orig- 
inal languages  in  order  to  become  acquainted  with  the  mat- 
ters of  tact  recorded  in  the  bible.  We  never  should  have 
seen,  nor  even  heard,  of  so  much  controversy  and  biblical. 


16  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

criticism,  if  the  disputes  had  been  wholly  relative  to  matters 
of  fact.  No,  all  the  various  readings,  different  translations, 
and  interpolations,  have  little  or  nothing  to  do  with  a  dis- 
pute of  this  kind.  But  if  the  facts  can  be  disputed,  they 
must  be  disputed  upon  other  grounds  than  that  of  biblical 
criticism. 

"  Take,  for  instance,  the  c  death  and  resurrection  of  the 
man  Christ  Jesus,'  which  you  have  mentioned  ;  can  any  one 
suppose  that  there  ever  was,  or  ever  will  be,  a  translation 
which  makes  any  thing  more  or  less  in  favour  of  this  fact? 
This  is  not  pretended.  And  if  not,  how  does  a  knowledge 
of  the  Greek  language  help  me  to  believe  this  fact? 

"  This  brings  me  again  to  my  main  subject ;  and  now  two 
v^ry  important  questions  arise  in  my  mind. 

w  1.  In  relation  to  the  facts,  as  stated,  respecting  the  life, 
death,  and  resurrection  of  the  l  man  Christ  Jesus  y  are  they 
positively  and  absolutely  true  ? 

"  2.  Admitting  the  truth  of  the  facts,  does  it  necessarily 
follow,  or  is  there  any  thing  which  renders  it  certain,  that, 
in  regard  to  other  things,  neither  he,  nor  the  apostles,  so 
called,  could  be  mistaken  ?  And  that,  in  all  their  writings, 
they  have  stated  nothing  which  is  incorrect  ?  That  is,  what 
certain  evidence  have  we  that  the  writers  of  the  books, 
which  being  compiled,  are  called  the  New  Testament,  were 
all  honest  men  ?  That  (hey  could  not  have  been  mistaken 
relative  to  the  things  which  they  have  written  ?  And  that 
in  every  instance,  they  have  written  the  truth  ? 

M  Respecting  the  first  proposition,  I  have  already  observed 
that  the  truth  of  it  does  not,  neither  can  it,  depend  on  biblical 
criticism.  They  are  either  facts,  which  are  substantially 
correct,  or  they  are  fabrications.  The  circumstantial  dif- 
ferences between  the  original  copies  themselves,  as  record- 
ed by  the  four  Evangelists,  are  much  greater  than  what  can 
be  found  in  all  the  different  versions,  translations,  &,c.  that 
have  been  collated.  Hence  no  argument  can  be  brought 
against  the  truth  of  those  facts  from  either  a  real  or  supposed 
difference  between  the  translation,  and  their  respective 
originals.  For  even  if  not  only  the  original  copies,  but  the 
language  also  in  which  they  were  originally  written,  should 
be  entirely  lost,  it  would  not  militate,  as  I  can  see,  against  the 
truth  of  the  facts  therein  recorded. 

'4  The  translation  acknowledges  and  affirms  itself  to  be  a 
translation  out  of  the  '  original  Greek,'  together  with  for- 
mer translations  compared,  &c.     Now  permit  me  to  asl$,  k 


SERIES    OF   LETTERS.  17 

aot  this  as  good  evidence  of  the  existence  of  the  original 
Greek,  as  the  original  Greek  is  of  the  facts  intended  to  be 
proved  thereby  ?  I  should  consider  the  translation  of  any 
work,  which  was  generally  known  at  the  time  of  its  transla- 
tion, better  evidence  of  the  existence  of  such  a  work,  though 
the  original  should  be  entirely  lost,  than  the  work  itself, 
even  in  the  original,  could  be  of  the  existence  of  facts, 
which,  if  they  existed  at  all,  were  known  at  first  to  but  very 
few. 

"  You  have  suggested,  sir,  that  if  the  original  of  the  scrip- 
tures were  entirely  lost,  future  ages  would  not  know  but 
they  had  been  ;  imposed  upon.'  I  think,  however,  you  will 
not  insist  on  this  point,  lest  you  should  destroy  an  argument, 
which,  hereafter,  you  may  very  much  need.  I  recall  my 
words.  For  this  seems  to  imply  that  we  are  already  engag- 
ed in  a  controversy  ;  whereas,  I  trust  we  are  both  candidly 
in  search  of  truth.  1  suspect,  however,  there  is  too  much 
truth  in  your  suggestion  ;  but  then  its  truth,  instead  of  re- 
lieving, only  increases  my  difficulty. 

"  Every  one  must  know  that  when  the  translation  of  the 
scriptures  was  first  made,  the  original  not  only  existed,  but 
it  must  have  been  known  to  others,  beside  the  translators, 
who  were  able  to  detect  the  fraud,  if  there  had  been  any, 
as  to  substantial  matter  of  fact.  And,  in  a  work  of  so  great 
importance,  this  certainly  would  have  been  the  case.  Hence 
you  will  at  once  perceive,  that  when  the  copies  were  few 
in  number,  and  before  the  art  of  printing  was  discovered, 
fabrications  and  interpolations  might  find  their  way  into  the 
original  scriptures  with  much  greater  facility,  than  could  any 
considerable  variations  by  an  intentionally  erroneous  trans- 
lation ;  especially  after  the  work  become  generally  known 
and  so  highly  valued,  as  to  require  a  translation  of  it.     But, 

u  As  you  admit  that  '  reason  is  the  eye  by  which  we  are 
to  examine  the  evidences'  which  stand  in  support  of  the  '  re- 
surrection of  the  man  Christ  Jesus,'  and  of  course,  as  I  pre- 
sume, by  which  we  are  to  examine  the  evidences  in  support 
of  all  other  subjects,  I  shall  say  no  more  upon  this  part  of 
the  subject  until  I  hear  your  reasons  for  believing  in  the 
resurrection  of  Jesus ;  for  this  fact,  as  I  conceive,  must  be 
considered  th*  main  hinge  on  which  the  whole  christian  sys- 
tem rests,  if  it  can  be  supported  by  any  fact,  on  which  it  will 
finally  turn. 

2.  "  But  after  all,  my  greatest  difficulty  is  with  my  sec- 
ond  proposition.      To    relate   facts   substantially    correct., 
2* 


13  SERIES   OF   LETTERS. 

which  persons  have  either  seen  or  heard,  requires  no  degree 
of  uncommon  skill,  or  uncommon  honesty ;  but  to  state 
things  which  will  absolutely  take  place,  which  are  yet  fu- 
ture, requires  something  more  than  common  skill ;  and  to 
state  things,  correctly,  which  will  take  place  in  eternity, 
must,  as  I  conceive,  require  nothing  short  of  divine  wisdom. 
That  the  evangelists  have  stated  nothing  more  than  what  is 
substantially  correct,  as  it  respects  matters  of  fact,  will  be 
admitted  by  all :  for  every  one  knows  there  is  a  circumstan- 
tial difference  in  their  writings,  both  as  it  respects  the  order 
of  time,  and  in  several  instances,  as  it  respects  matters  of 
fact. 

"  If  the  account  given  us  of  Jesus  be  even  substantially 
correct,  I  think  there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  but  that  he 
was  capable  of  telling  his  disciples  every  thing  which  it  con- 
cerns us  to  know  relative  to  a  future  state  of  existence. — 
But  I  have  been  often  struck  with  astonishment,  when  re- 
flecting on  the  subject,  that  Jesus  said  so  little  in  regard  to  a 
future  state  !  Notwithstanding  he  was  long  with  his  disci- 
ples, as  we  are  told  after  his  resurrection,  and  did  eat  and 
drink  with  them;  yet,  how  silent  he  was  upon  the  subject- 
of  eternity,  and  of  a  future  and  spiritual  world  !  At  the 
only  time  when  we  should  rationally  suppose  that  he  could 
be  a  competent  witness  in  the  case,  admitting  his  death  and 
resurrection  true,  is  the  time  when  he  is  entirely  silent  as  to 
the  final  and  eternal  state  of  man  !  Should  we  admit  there- 
fore that  Jesus  at  this  time  was  capable  of  declaring  eternal 
truths,  yet,  as  he  testified  nothing  on  the  subject,  nothing  re- 
lative to  the  subject  can  be  proved  from  his  testimony. 

"  It  may  be  said  that  Christ  had  plainly  taught  his  disci- 
ples respecting  this  subject,  previous  to  his  death,  and  there- 
fore it  was  not  necessary  for  him  to  say  any  thing  more  re- 
specting it.  But  a  confirmation  of  what  he  had  before  taught, 
if  it  had  been  repeated  after  his  resurrection,  would  have 
added  great  weight  to  his  former  testimony.  We  need  not 
dwell  however,  upon  these  niceties,  as  the  main  question  is 
not  involved  in  them.  Yet  I  am  inclined  to  think  that  if  all 
the  words  of  Christ,  which  have  been  handed  down  to  us, 
should  be  closely  examined,  they  would  be  found  to  be  much 
more  silent  on  the  subject  of  a  future  state  than  many  have 
supposed.  But  the  main  question  is,  are  we  certain  that  he 
could  not  have  been  mistaken  in  the  things  whereof  he 
affirmed  ?  This  question  may  be  thought  blasphemous  :  but 
1  cannot  see  wherein  the  blasphemy  consists  j  for  I  cannot 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  19 

help  making  the  inquiry,  in  my  own  understanding,  and  as 
my  object  is  to  gain  instruction,  I  put  the  inquiry  on  paper 
You  may  say  that  Jesus  was  endowed  with  divine  wisdom. 
and  therefore  could  not  err.  That  divine  wisdom  cannot 
err,  I  admit,  but  does  divine  wisdom  secure  man  at  all  times, 
and  under  all  circumstances,  from  mistake  ?  If  the  man 
Christ  Jesus  was  in  fact  man  (and  that  he  was  man,  even 
Trinitarians  admit)  notwithstanding  he  was  endowed  with 
divine  wisdom,  why  might  he  not  without  any  dishonour  to 
the  Deity,  be  sometimes  left  to  exercise  only  the  wisdom  of 
man  ?  And  to  say  that  the  wisdom  of  man  cannot  err,  would 
be  saying  contrary  to  daily  experience.  I  have  not  con- 
tended that  Jesus  ever  erred;  but  I  contend  that  he  must 
have  been  liable  to  eri'or,  or  else  he  was  not  man.  And 
the  supposition  that  he  did  not  err,  not  even  in  thought  or 
opinion,  ought  not  to  be  admitted  without  the  most  conclu- 
sive testimony. 

"  But  whatever  may  be  the  conclusion  on  this  subject,  a? 
it  respects  the  '  man  Christ  Jesus — a  man  approved  of  God,' 
yet  what  shall  we  say  concerning  the  apostles  ?  Were 
they  also  absolutely  secured  from  error?  These  men,  ac- 
cording to  the  confession  of  one  of  them  at  least,  not  only 
had  been,  but  still  were — sinners.  Paul,  notwithstanding  his 
apostleship,  still  acknowledges  the  plague  of  his  own  heart 
4  I  am  carnal,  sold  under  sin — when  I  would  do  good,  evil  is 
present  with  me — O  wretched  man  that  I  am !'  &.c.  Are 
such  men  absolutely  proof  against  even  the  error  of  opinion  ? 
It  appears  to  me  there  are  too  many  incidents  of  imperfec- 
tion recorded  in  the  lives  of  the  apostles  to  admit  all  this. 
Peter  once  rebuked  his  master,  at  nnother  time  denied  him. 
He  once  objected  to  the  voice  of  the  spirit,  and  was  after- 
wards accused  by  his  brethren  for  obeying  it.  Paul  accused 
Peter  to  his  face,  and  also  disagreed  with  Barnabas.  And 
other  circumstances  might  be  named,  proving  them  to  be 
destitute  of  intuitive  knowledge.  Considering,  therefore, 
all  these  things,  how  do  we  know  but  that  in  their  zeal  to 
do  good,  (for  I  do  not  consider  the  apostles  bad  men  ;  neither 
do  I  think  an}'  the  worse  of  Paul  for  either  acknowledging 
his  own  faults,  or  detecting  the  dissimulation  of  Peter,)  I  say 
therefore,  in  their  zeal  to  do  good,  how  do  we  know  but 
thai  they  stated  things  relative  to  another  world,  which 
were  only  inferences,  which,  as  they  supposed,  were  justly 
drawn  from  what  they  had  either  seen  or  heard,  or  else 
what  their  own   fruitful  imagination  dictated  ?     If  we  are 


20  SERIES    OF   LETTERS. 

at  liberty  to  view  the  apostles  in  this  light,  however  highly 
their  opinions  are  to  be  valued  and  respected,  yet  I  see  no 
occasion  of  investigating  their  writings  with'the  eye  of  bibli- 
cal or  grammatical  criticism ;  for  after  all,  they  are  but  the 
opinions  of  men  like  ourselves. 

"  But  if  it  can  be  demonstrated  that  the  opinions  of  the 
writers  of  the  New  Testament  can  be  relied  on,  as  contain- 
ing eternal  truth,  without  any  mixture  of  error,  then  it  is 
very  important  for  us  to  know  the  meaning  of  all  the  words 
they  used,  not  only  as  it  respects  their  general  import,  but 
also  the  exact  and  particular  sense  in  which  they  used  them. 
This  however  cannot  be  done  without  a  thorough  acquaint- 
ance, not  only  with  the  Greek,  but  also  with  the  Hebrew 
language,  for  they  used  many  Hebraisms,  which,  with  a 
knowledge  of  the  Greek  only,  we  should  not  be  likely  fully 
to  comprehend. 

«  Yours,  &c.  A.  KNEELAND." 


LETTER  II. 

Much  esteemed  friend, — In  replying  to  your  second  num- 
ber, you  will  excuse  me  if  I  begin  by  finding  some  fault,  in 
which,  however,  I  will  endeavour  to  be  as  sparing  as  the 
case  will  admit. 

On  the  subject  of  the  languages,  after  reading  in  your 
first  number  the  following  in  its  connexion  :  "  If  I  understand 
the  above  proposition,  it  seems  to  be  this  ;  the  only  revela- 
tion of  God  to  man,  which  was  ever  recorded  on  vellum  or 
paper,  was  written  partly  in  Greek  and  partly  in  Hebrew  ; 
hence  the  revealed  will  of  God  cannot  be  known  only 
through  the  medium  of  these  languages.  If  the  truth  of  all 
this  could  be  made  to  appear,"  &c.  and  after  replying  to 
your  argument  on  this  subject,  I  can  hardly  account  for  the 
insinuation  in  your  second  number,  by  which  you  suggest, 
that  you  had  no  particular  allusion  to  a  revelation  from  God 
when  you  spoke  of  translating  the  most  valuable  of  ancient 
writings,  &c.  The  subject  of  a  revelation  you  acknowledge 
to  be  your  main  object  ;  if  this  be  the  case,  you  have  this 
object  in  view  when  you  speak  of  the  Greek  and  Hebrew, 
and  also  when  you  speak  of  the  arts  and  sciences. 

You  contend  in  your  second  number,  that  the  translation 
of  the  Scriptures   out  of  the    original    languages  is  as  good 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS,  21 

evidence  of  the  existence  of  the  original,  as  the  original 
could  be  of  the  facts  they  relate,  &c.  And  this  I  believe  is 
the  only  acknowledgement  you  make  in  favour  of  the  orig- 
inal's having  been  any  benefit.  You  seem  not  willing  to  al- 
low that  the  retaining  of  the  original  language  is  of  any  use 
in  proving  to  after  generations  that  the  translation  was  cor- 
rect, which  seems  not  easy  to  account  for.  But  I  will  give 
you  no  further  trouble  on  the  subject  of  this  nature  ;  nor 
will  I  occupy  my  time  in  investigating  the  question  relative 
to  the  necessity  of  studying  those  languages,  which  you  ac- 
knowledge is  off  from  your  main  subject,  and  take  some  no- 
tice of  your  queries  respecting  a  divine  revelation.  Al- 
though 1  am  unable  to  trace  the  connexion  of  many  of  your 
remarks  with  what  you  call  your  main  subject,  yet  I  am  not 
disposed  to  doubt  that  you  comprehend  such  connexion  — 
1  think  I  understand  your  statements  so  as  to  be  able  to  dis- 
cern the  following  particulars,  as  subjects  of  your  inquiry. 

1st.  "  Is  it  reasonable  to  suppose  that  God  has  ever 
made  a  special  revelation  to  man  ?  2d.  Is  the  resurrec- 
tion of  Jesus  capable  of  being  proved.  And,  3d.  If  so,  does 
it  follow  that  this  was  designed  by  divine  wisdom  to  give  us 
any  hope  respecting  a  future  state  ?" 

It  is  not  pretended  that  you  have  stated  these  questions 
just  in  this  order,  but  these  are  the  subjects  which  your  sec- 
ond number  suggests  to  my  mind. 

I  shall  take  a  much  nearer  road  to  come  to  a  solution  of 
these  questions,  than  that  which  would  lead  me  to  follow 
you  through  all  your  remarks,  because  you  have  furnished 
me  with  the  means  to  do  so. 

1st  You  acknowledge  that  a  divine  revelation  M  if  real," 
is  of  "  all  truths  the  most  important."  Here  let  the  eye  of 
reason  examine.  Why  should  a  revelation  from  God  be  more 
important  than  those  discoveries  which  our  Creator  has  ena- 
bled us  to  make  in  the  arts  and  aciences  ?  Why  should  such 
revelation  be  more  important  than  the  use  of  the  mariner's 
compass,  or  the  art  of  printing  ?  Even  without  contending 
that  a  divine  revelation  is  of  any  greater  importance  than  the 
arts  and  sciences,  your  allowing  it  any  importance  at  all,  is, 
in  the  eye  of  reason  an  argument  in  its  support.  Had  you 
taken  the  other  road,  and  contended  that  there  was  no  ne- 
cessity of  a  revelation,  and  had  you  been  able  to  make  this 
appear,  you  would  have  proved  to  the  eye  of  reason,  that  a 
Being  of  infinite  wisdom,  who  can  never  act  without  a  just 
cause,  bad  never  made  a  revelation.       But  if  reason  admits 


22  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

of  its  importance,  as  long  as  this  is  the  case,  it  will  be  look- 
ing not  only  with  a  fervent  desire,  but  with  expectation  till 
it  makes  the  discovery.  You  will,  no  doubt,  allow  that  a  di- 
vinely munificient  Creator  would  not  omit  any  thing  which  is 
of  importance  to  his  intelligent  creatures. 

Perhaps  you  will,  (though  I  do  not  see  why  you  should) 
call  up  a  former  query,  which  was  answered  in  my  first, 
which  answer  was  not  receipted  in  your  second,  and  ask  why 
this  revelation  was  not  made  in  every  nation,  in  every  lan- 
guage, and  in  everv  age  ?  But  you  will  be  sensible  that  the 
same  questions  might  be  stated  respecting  the  progress  of 
science  and  the  discovery  of  the  arts  useful  to  a  refined  state 
of  society. 

You  will  not  think  it  strange  that  I  am  some  disappointed 
that  you  took  no  notice  of  my  remarks  on  the  above  query 
as  I  really  attach  importance  to  that  little  peace  of  reason- 
ing. If  reason  has  no  reluctance  in  acknowledging  that  man 
is  multiplied  and  continued  here  by  a  law  which  was  not 
able  to  bring  him  into  existence  at  first,  why  may  not  a  rev- 
elation from  God,  be  perpetuated  by  different  means  than 
those  which  first  made  it,  and  thereby  the  great  object  be 
even  better  secured  than  by  a  perpetual  revelation,  which 
would  seem  to  render  research  unnecessary,  and  leave  the 
reasoning  powers  without  employ  ? 

But  it  is  time  for  me  to  inform  you  that  I  feel  myself  under 
no  obligations  to  labour  to  prove  what  you  and  I  and  many 
thousands  of  others  have  considered  sufficiently  proved  from 
ancient  prophesy  with  which  our  heavenly  Father  has  fa- 
voured so  many  ages  and  nations  and  languages.  And  fur- 
thermore, permit  nte  to  tell  you,  that  if  you  are  disposed  to 
doubt  and  to  disprove  what  you  acknowledge  to  be  of  such 
vast  importance,  it  is  your  province  to  bring  forward  your 
strong  reasoning,  if  such  you  have,  by  which  the  prophesies 
of  the  old  testament,those  delivered  by  Christ  and  his  apostles 
shall  be  made  to  appear  either  to  have  no  just  analogy  with 
the  events  of  which  they  speak,  or  that  they  were  contrived 
by  impostors  since  the  events  took  place. 

2d.  You  acknowledge  the  validity  of  the  evidences  in  fa- 
vor of  the  resurrection  of  Jesus.  You  say  ;  "  That  the  e- 
vangelists  have  stated  nothing  more  than  what  is  substan- 
tially correct,  as  it  respects  matters  of  fact,  will  he  admitted 
by  all."  Again  ;  "  I  do  not  consider  the  apostles  bad  men." 
Now  the  apostles  are  the  deponents  who  solemnly  testify 
the  fact  of  the  resurrection  of  Jesus.     Why  should  you  wish 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  23 

me  to  prove  what  you  allow  to  be  true.  Why  do  you  not 
take  the  other  hand,  and  say  the  apostles  were  impostors, 
they  were  the  opponents  of  the  righteous  rulers  of  the  Jews 
who  put  their  master  to  death  ?  Why  do  you  not  avail  your- 
self of  the  story  put  into  the  mouths  of  the  guard  who  watch- 
ed the  sepulchre,  and  say  that  those  timid  disciples  who  all 
flpd  and  left  Jesus  when  they  saw  him  bound,  not  only  went 
to  the  sepulchre  and  stole  the  body  of  Jesus  and  hid  it  where 
no  mortal  could  over  find  it,  but  then  went  to  Jerusalem  and 
boldly  affirmed  he  was  alive,  who  was  dead,  and  then  had 
the  boldness  and  audacity  to  accuse  the  rulers  of  having  "  de- 
nied the  holy  one  and  the  just,  and  desired  a  murderer 
to  be  delivered  unto  fbem  ;  and  of  having  killed  the  prince 
of  life,  whom  God  had  raised  from  the  dead  ?"  The  reason 
is  obvious,  you  see  the  impropriety  of  such  argument. — 
But, 

3d.  Allowing  the  resurrection  of  Jesus,  the  truth  of  di- 
vine revelation,  the  honesty  of  the  apostles  of  Jesus,  are  we 
to  rely  on  what  they  say  respecting  a  future  state?  An- 
swer, yes,  most  assuredly.  For  here  let  reason  ask,  wheth- 
er a  divine  revelation  founded  on  the  resurrection  of  Jesus 
could  have  a  more  reasonable  object,  than  the  bringing  to 
light,  life  and  immortality  ?  Again  let  reason  ask  whether 
the  divine  Being  would  endow  Jesus  and  his  apostles  with 
the  gift  of  miracles,  by  which  the  divinity  of  their  missions 
was  proved  to  the  understanding  of  all  who  believed,  and 
thensutfer  them  to  teach  things  of  a  moral,  a  religious,  or  of 
an  eternal  nature  which  were  not  true  ?  By  so  doing,  it 
would  seem  that  God  gave  power  to  heal  the  sick  and  to 
raise  the  dead  for  no  other  purpose  than  to  go  in  the  atten- 
tion of  men  to  what  was  the  mere  guess  wook  of  men  subject 
to  error  in  the  things  which  they  pretended  to  teach. 

For  myself  I  am  perfectly  satisfied  that  infinite  goodness 
would  never  do  any  thing  so  imperfectly.  I  am  satisfied, 
being  convinced  of  the  truth  of  the  facts  which  you  acknowl- 
edge, that  the  testimony  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles  respect- 
ing this  and  the  coming  world,  may  be  relied  on  with  the  ut- 
most confidence  and  safety.  You  intimate  that  Jesus  said 
but  a  little  on  the  subject  of  a  future  state.  I  am  entirely  of 
your  opinion.  And  yet  I  am  persuaded  that  he  and  his  apos- 
tles have  snid  as  much  on  the  subject  as  is  necessary  for  us 
to  believe  The}'  have  given  sufficient  proof  that  the  design 
of  our  Creator  is  a  design  of  eternal  goodness  to  our  race  of 
being.       Jesus  has  brought  life  and  immortality  to   light 


24  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

through  the  gospel.  The  christian  is  enabled  to  hope  for 
existence  with  God  in  an  eternal  state,  and  this  is  as  much 
as  our  present  welfare  requires.  I  have  no  doubt  that  ma- 
ny passages  of  scripture  have  been  applied  to  a  future 
world,  by  christian  expositors,  which  have  no  allusion  to 
such  a  case — but  this  harms  not  the  glorious  truths  and  di- 
vine realities  of  the  religion  of  the  blessed  Saviour. 

I  have  many  reasons  for  not  believing  in  the  general  sen- 
timent that  supposes  the  revelation  contained  in  the  scrip* 
tures  was  designed  to  prepare  men  in  this  world  for  happi- 
upss  in  another,  and  that  a  want  of  a  correct  knor.ledge  of 
this  revelation  here,  would  subject  the  ignorant  to  incon- 
veniences in  a  future  state.  Such  a  sentiment  is  an  impeach- 
ment of  the  wisdom  and  goodness  of  God.  For  if  this  were 
the  case,  why  was  the  gospel  not  earty  published  to  all  peo- 
ple ?  Why  were  ages  after  ages  suffered  to  pass  away,  and 
generations  after  generations  permitted  to  sink  into  eternity 
without  a  ray  of  that  light  which  was  indispensable  to  their 
everlasting  happiness  ?  Was  it  not  as  easy  for  ihe  eternal 
to  send  his  son  at  the  dawn  of  time  as  after  so  many  ages  had 
passed  away  ?  Was  it  not  as  easy  for  him  to  communicate 
to  all  nation  as  to  one  ?  But  divine  wisdom  has  seen  fit  to 
manifest  itself  by  degrees  in  the  system  of  the  gospel  as  well 
as  in  the  knowledge  of  science  ;  and  we  have  no  more  evi- 
dence to  believe,  that  those  who  go  from  this  state  to  another 
ignorant  of  the  gospel  of  Christ,  will,  on  that  account,  be 
rejected  of  God  from  his  favour,  than  we  have  to  believe 
that  those  who  have  died  ignorant  of  the  sciences,  will,  on 
that  account  be  so  rejected. 

Every  communication  from  God,  whether  relative  to  the 
moral  or  physical  world  is  evidently  designed  for  our  profit 
in  the  state  where  such  communication  is  made.  This  im- 
provement of  the  moral  and  religious  state  of  man  was  the 
evident  design  of  the  revelation  of  God,  and  to  this  agree  all 
the  prophets.  "  Instead  of  the  thorn  shall  come  up  the  fir- 
tree,  and  instead  of  the  briar  shall  come  up  the  myrtle- 
tree." 

You  seem  to  be  opposed  to  biblical  criticisms.  So  am  I, 
if  the  object  be  to  fix  a  creed  to  which  all  must  conform  on 
pain  of  being  anathematized,  but  if  the  object  be  to  get  the 
right  understanding  of  the  sacred  text  all  in  humble  submis- 
sion to  that  charity  which  is  greater  than  a  faith  that  could 
remove  mountains,  no  harm  can  ever  arise  from  it,  but  a 
benefit.  - 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  25 

No  one  can  more  sincerely  wish  to  have  the  frivolities  of 
superstition  and  the  endless  multitude  of  nothings  which  ar- 
rogant creed-makers  have  impiously  superadded  to  pure 
Christianity  removed  from  the  church  than  I  do  ;  but  wisdom 
must  direct  in  this  great  and  necessary  work.  It  was  those 
who  had  more  zeal  than  discernment  who  asked  if  they 
should  pluck  up  the  tares  from  among  the  wheat  ?  They  were 
told  that  they  would  pluck  up  the  wheat  with  the  tares. — 
Let  us  be  careful,  my  brother,  and  in  our  zeal  to  cleanse, 
take  care  and  not  destroy. 

If  you  are  troubled  with  unbelief,  if  this  plague  have  en- 
tered your  heart,  permit  me  to  suggest  a  remedy.  Humili- 
ty is  the  first  step,  sincere  piety  towards  God  the  second  ,  let 
these  be  followed  by  that  for  which  the  Bereans  were  com- 
mended and  the  deadly  virus  of  unbelief  will  soon  be  purged. 
Will  you  say  ;  "  physician  heal  thyself?"  I  reply,  I  think  I 
have  found  relief  by  the  use  of  the  prescription,  and  am  so 
much  in  favour  of  it,  that  I  am  determined  to  continue  its  ap- 
lication  myself  as  well  as  recommend  it  to  others.  If  you 
ask  why  I  do  not  direct  some  arguments  more  cogently  to 
prove  divine  revelation  ?  I  answer,  in  the  first  place,  you 
have  granted  the  validity  of  the  evidences  ;  and  secondly, 
if  I  think  of  the  attempt,  the  brilliant  labours  of  better  abil- 
ities argue  the  impropriety  of  it. 

But  if  you  think  it  necessary  to  labour  this  subject,  I  will 
propose  the  single  instance  of  the  conversion  of  St.  Paul  for 
investigation.  By  this  means  we  shall  be  kept  from  ram- 
bling after  different  subjects.  If  you  can  give  a  reasonable 
account  of  this  conversion  without  admitting  the  truth  of 
Christianity,  I  will  acknowledge  you  have  left  me  destitute  of 
one  evidence  on  which  I  now  rely.  On  the  other  hand,  if 
you  fail  in  this,  you  may  reasonably  suppose  that  you  would 
fail  in  any  other  case  of  equal  moment  in  this  general  con- 
troversy. 

Yours,  kc.  H.  BALLOU. 


[The  letter  containing  extracts  No.  1,  having  been  laid  before  the 
Rev.  Edward  Turner,  of  Charlestown,  Mass.  he  saw  fit  to  reply  to 
it.     The  following  are  extracts  from  his  letter.] 

"Passing  over  the  principal  parts  of  your  introduction, 
which  generally  embrace  sentiments  to  which  I  readily  sub- 
scribe, I  will  just  notice  what  you  say  concerning  the  study 

3 


26  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

of  languages.  I  am  not  so  tenacious  of  this  kind  of  study,  as 
to  believe  that  too  much  time  has  not  often  been  employed 
in  it.  I  am  also  convinced  with  you,  that  6  the  truth  or  falsi- 
ty of  every  proposition  must  depend  on  the  truth  or  falsity  of 
the  principles  embraced  in  it.'  But  still  I  am  not  able  to  say 
that  the  study  ol  Greek  and  Hebrew  can  be  of  no  '  possible 
service  to  an  American.'  Neither,  because  those  languages 
are  not  a  perfect  l  security'  against  falsehood,  does  it  neces- 
sarily follow  that  they  are  no  '  security'  at  all.  For  how 
shall  we  arrive  at  the  knowledge  of  the  'principle  embrac- 
ed in  a  proposition'  without  the  knowledge  and  use  of  lan- 
guage ?  We  cannot  in  any  other  way.  JNrow  if  it  be  a  fact, 
that  a  proposition  embracing  certain  principles  may  suffer 
by  translation,  and  even  its  principles  be  perverted  and  mis- 
represented, then,  an  understanding  of  the  original,  in  which 
the  proposition  was  written,  may,  in  my  opinion,  be  very 
useful.  It  may  assist  a  man  to  arrive  at  a  true  knowledge 
of  the  4  principles'  upon  which  said  proposition  is  founded. 

u  i  jt  gives  you  pain  to  see  *hat  time  and  money,  what  la- 
bour and  toil  are  expended  in  plodding  over  an  old  dead  let- 
ter, to  learn  languages,  which  exist  nowhere  only  on  paper, 
barely  for  the  sake  of  reading  the  opinions  of  other  men,  in 
other  times  ;  men  who  lived  in  other  ages  of  the  world,  and 
under  very  different  circumstances  from  ourselves,  whose 
opinions  (all  of  which  are  worth  preserving)  might  be  given 
in  our  own  language,  so  as  to  answer  every  purpose,'  &c— 
But  if  these  '  opinions'  should  be  given  in  our  own  language, 
there  must  be  some  to  understand  Greek  and  Hebrew,  or  the 
opinions  of  those  ancient  writers,  let  them  be  worth  ever  so 
much,  would  never  find  their  way  to  us.  And  when  we  have 
gained  those  supposed  opinions,  through  the  translation,  how 
do  we  know  that  the  translators  were  faithful  ?  Who  can 
say  they  were  not  warped  by  system  ?  not  misled  by  precon- 
ceived ideas  ?  Who  can  say  they  have  not  wilfully  imposed 
upon  us  ?  Under  such  circumstances,  the  ability  to  detect 
any  inaccuracies  or  imposition,  would,  in  my  view,  be  very 
desirable.  You  have,  yourself,  my  brother,  availed  your- 
self of  this  ability,  and  very  justly  merited  the  gratitude  of 
your  readers,  by  rectifying  the  judgment,  upon  certain  terms 
used  in  the  scriptures,  the  former  translation  of  which,  you 
have  disavowed.  As  I  value  those  efforts  of  yours,  and  have 
been  instructed  and  edified  by  them,  I  am  proportionably 
sorry  to  find  them  treated  in  the  language  of  disparage- 
ment. 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  27 

M  You  observe  that  *  the  learned  are  full  as  much  at  va- 
riance with  each  other  as  the  unlearned,'  and  this  circum- 
stance you  say,  '  weakens  your  confidence.1  But  upon  what 
subject  are  they  not  at  variance,  even  were  Greek  and  He- 
brew are  not  concerned  ?  Have  philosophers  been  always 
agreed,  when  they  have  discoursed  in  one  language  ?  Have 
chymists  been  always  of  one  opinion,  though  the  subjects  of 
their  investigations  are  material  bodies  ?  You  will  not  re- 
ply affirmatively.  And  if  not,  and  no  system  can  be  found 
which  is  not  in  some  degree  l  liable  to  misconstruction,  dis- 
putation and  deception,' — what  are  we  to  do.  Shall  we  de- 
pend upon  nothing?  Shall  we  remain  immovable  for  fear 
we  should  fall  ?  Shall  we  never  attempt  to  waik  for  fear 
we  should  stumble  ?  I  must  be  allowed  to  express  my  con- 
cern, that,  it  should  appear  l  not  a  little  extraordinary  to 
you  that  God  should  make  a  revelation  of  his  will  in  one  asre 
and  not  in  another,  to  one  nation  and  not  to  another,  or  in 
one  language  and  not  in  another,  and  if  a  special  revelation 
was  ever  necessary  at  all  it  is  difficult  for  you  to  see,  why  it 
is  not  equally  necessary,  in  all  ages  of  the  world,  to  all  na- 
tions of  the  earth  and  in  all  languages  ever  spoken  by  man.' 
It  is  true,  I  may  be  unable  to  see  why  a  revelation  was  not 
equally  necessary  to  one  nation  as  well  as  to  another,  and  at 
the  same  time,  but  is  this  a  proof  that  no  revelation  was  ever 
made  to  any  nation  at  any  time  ?  1  know  of  no  special  rea- 
son why  the  laws  of  electricity  were  not  developed  to  my 
grandfather  as  well  as  to  Dr.  Franklin,  with  whom  he  was 
cotemporary;  or  why  the  great  principles  of  civil  liberty 
should  not  have  been  discovered  to  other  nations  as  well  as  to 
our  own,  and  at  the  same  time,  or  to  all  nations,  a  thousand 
years  before  they  were  discovered  to  one.  But  all  this  is 
no  discredit  to  those  discoveries.  But  I  find  reason  to  doubt 
whether  a  revelation  l  is  equally  necessary  in  all  ages  of  the 
world.'  I  doubt  whether  a  special  revelation  is  now  neces- 
sary ;  and  for  a  very  obvious  reason;  because  a  special 
revelation  has  already  been  made.  And  as  this,  though  at 
first,  really  special,  follows  the  general  course  of  other 
things  which  are  beneficial,  and  which  commence  with  a  few 
and  diffuse  themselves  to  many,  it  is  a  reason  which  pre- 
cludes the  necessity  of  a  constant  recurrence  of  miracles  or 
any  other  special  medium  of  revelation.  You  certainly  will 
not  deny,  that,  admitting  there  has  been  a  revelation  from 
God,  it  has  been  progressive  like  all  things  else,  which  in- 
volve  the  interests  of  man.     If  we  admit  these  facts,  they 


28  SERIES   OF    LETTERS. 

will  go  far  to  explain  some  of  the  difficulties,  to  which  you 
allude  ;  but  if  we  do  not,  our  disbelieving  in  a  special  reve- 
lation will  not  remove,  but  increase  our  difficulties. 

"  Your's,  kc.  E.  TURNER." 


EXTRACTS  No.  III. 

[To  the  extracts  above,  the  objector  replied  as  follows.] 
u  Remarking  on  the  doubts  which  unavoidably  arise  in  my 
mind  on  account  of  the  diversity  in  the  opinions  of  the  learn- 
ed respecting  the  meaning  of  certain  parts  of  the  scriptures, 
our  friend  asks,  i  upon  what  subject  are  they  (the  learned) 
not  at  variance,  even  when  Greek  and  Hebrew  are  not  con- 
cerned ?  Have  chymists  been  always  of  one  opinion  V  &c. 
which  must  be  answered  in  the  negative.  Nevertheless  I 
may  take  liberty  to  observe  that  inasmuch  as  they  have  dis- 
agreed, it  shews  that  the  subjects  about  what  they  have  dis- 
agreed, are  as  yet  obscure,  and  therefore  perhaps  none  of 
them  are  entitled  to  full  and  complete  c  confidence :'  for 
whatever  is  plain  and  obvious,  men  seldom  disagree  about. 
That  the  sun  and  moon  are  globes,  and  not  triangles,  all  are 
agreed  ;  and  it  would  be  impossible  to  raise  a  dispute  on  the 
subject :  but  whether  either  or  both  of  them  are  inhabited, 
or  even  capable  of  being  inhabited,  by  rational  beings,  simi- 
lar or  like  unto  ourselves,  is  a  proposition  not  so  clear,  and 
respecting  which  the  greatest  philosophers  might  possibly 
disagree.  The  above  remarks  are  intended  to  shew  that 
when  men  differ  in  opinion,  whether  learned  or  unlearned, 
it  is  obvious  that  the  truth  about  which  they  differ,  to  say  the 
most  of  it,  is  yet  but  obscurely  made  manifest  to  their  un- 
derstanding. 

"  In  order  to  remove  an  objection,  to  the  idea  of  revela- 
tion, on  account  of  its  being  made  only  to  one  nation,  &c. 
our  friend  says,  '  It  is  true,  I  may  be  unable  to  see  why  a 
revelation  was  not  equally  necessary  to  one  nation  as  well 
as  to  another,  and  at  the  same  time  ;  but  is  this  a  proof  that 
no  revelation  was  ever  made  to  any  nation  at  any  time  V  I 
am  very  ready  to  answer  this  question  in  the  negative.  But 
at  the  same  time  I  must  be  excused  for  not  being  able  to  see 
any  analogy  between  revelation  and  the  discovery  of  the 
Maws  of  electricity;  as  mentioned  by  our  brother;  and 
therefore  my  mind  is  not  to  be  relieved  from  its  dfficulty  in 
this  way.     If  it  could  be  proved  that  the  principles  manifested 


SERIES   OF    LETTERS.  29 

by  revelation  were  like  the  principles  in  nature,  against  the 
developement  of  which  there  is  no  great  barrier  at  one  time 
than  at  another  except  what  exists  in  the  ignorance  of  man  ; 
and  if  the  christian  could  now  try  the  experiment  over 
again,  and  thereby  demonstrate  the  truth  of  the  doctrine  of 
the  resurrection,  the  same  as  the  philosopher  can  try  the  ex- 
periment for  himself,  and  thereby  demonstrate  the  truth  of 
the  doctrine  of  electricity,  then  my  doubts  or  surprise  at  the 
seeming  partiality  in  the  developement  or  discovery  of  the 
principles  of  the  doctrine  of  revelation  would  be  entirely  re- 
moved. But  the  very  idea  of  a  revelation  supposes  the  man- 
ifestation of  it  to  differ  essentially  from  all  the  discoveries  of 
man.  Therefore  the  remarks  of  our  friend  relative  to  the 
laws  of  electricity,  &c.  seem  to  be  hardly  in  point.  The 
evidences  of  revelation  to  all,  excepting  those  to  whom  the 
revelation  was  first  made,  are  in  their  very  nature  essentially 
different  from  the.  evidences  of  natural  philosophy,  chymis- 
trv,  &x.  For  these  are  founded  in  immutable  principles 
which  never  vary,  and  are  ever  open  at  all  times  to  thorough 
investigation  and  experiment.  Hence  if  the  learned  have 
any  doubts  on  the  subject,  those  doubts  may  be  removed  by 
occular  demonstration  ;  and  even  when  they  are  enabled  by 
any  new  discoveries  to  correct  some  former  opinion*,  which 
were  either  founded  on  mere  conjecture  or  imperfect  rea- 
soning, yet  the  first  principles  still  remain,  and  the  former 
evidences,  instead  of  being  weakened,  are  increased  by 
every  new  discovery  or  experiment  in  the  developement  of 
truth.  But  not  so  with  evidences  of  divine  revelation.  Al- 
though ever  so  clear  at  first,  and  so  well  supported  by  facts, 
concerning  which  the  witness  had  the  clearest  evidence, 
vet  the  evidences  being  of  such  a  nature  as  preclude  a  repe- 
tition, like  those  respecting  a  vision  of  the  night  or  any 
other  phenomenon,  are  liable  to  suffer  by  passing  from  one 
to  another,  and  also  to  be  impaired  by  every  change  which 
they  are  caused  to  pass.  And  if  the  evidences  of  any  fact 
maybe  weakened  at  all,  either  by  lapse  of  time,  or  by  pass- 
ing through  different  hands;  by  the  same  causes,  if  contin- 
ued, they  may  lose  all  their  strength.  That  the  evidences 
of  some  facts  may  be  thus  weakened,  I  believe  will  not  be 
denied.  Hence  what  was  once  clear  may  be  now  doubtful, 
and  in  process  of  time  ma}'  become  entitled  to  no  credit.  If 
therefore  the  evidence  of  revelation  either  have  been,,  or 
ever  shall  by  any  circumstances  whatever  be  thus  impaired, 
th^n  a  new   revelation  rivv  become   r>-^r^^.T>v 


30  SERIES   OF    LETTERS* 

revive  or  to  strengthen  the  evidences  of  the  old.  If  Christ 
should  make  his  second  appearance,  according  to  the  opin- 
ions of  some,  it  would  be  as  much  of  a  revelation  as  his  first 
appearance  was  ;  and  this  new  revelation  would  corrobo- 
rate and  confirm  the  old  ;  but  if  nothing  of  the  kind  should 
ever  take  place,  and  if  there  should  be  nothing  more  to  con- 
firm the  validity  of  prophesy,  but  let  the  world  pass  on  for 
several  thousand  years  as  we  know  it  has  for  fifteen  hundred 
years  past,  how  long  will  either  the  Jews  or  christians  be- 
lieve in  divine  revelation  ? 

UI  believe  however,  we  had  better  see  whether  the  old 
revelation  can  be  fully  proved  before  we  go  very  far  into  the 
inquiry  whether  a  new  one  is  necessary. 

"  That  I  deserve  any  credit  in  the  opinion  of  our  friend 
or  my  own  conscience  for  the  unwearied  pains  I  have  taken 
to  ascertain  the  correct  ideas  communicated  to  us  in  the 
scriptures  is  very  grateful  to  my  feelings  ;  and  let  it  not  be 
imagined  for  a  moment  that  I  feel  at  all  disposed  to  shrink 
from  my  former  assiduity  ;  for  as  long  as  the  world,  or  any 
considerable  part  thereof,  believe  the  scriptures  to  be  divine 
revelation  I  think  it  very  important  that  they  should  have  a 
correct  understanding  of  them.  So  long  therefore  as  I  hold 
this  to  be  my  profession,  I  mean  faithfully  to  pursue  it ; 
ever  remembering  that  I  am  not  accountable  in  the  least 
degree  either  for  the  truth  or  falsity  of  the  bible,  but  only 
for  my  faithfulness  in  preaching,  taking  heed  that  I  do  not 
preach  that  for  bible,  which  is  not  bible. 

"  Let  not  my  brethren  be  '  concerned,'  or  made  in  the 
least  degree  unhappy  on  my  account.  My  mind  was  never 
more  tranquil  respecting  religious  subjects  than  at  the  pre- 
sent moment.  My  doubts,  whatever  they  are,  give  me  no 
uneasiness  ;  they  only  excite  me  to  diligence  and  assiduity 
in  endeavouring  by  all  possible  means  to  ascertain  the  truth  ; 
and  wherever,  or  in  whatever  light,  it  shall  be  discovered, 
I  am  fully  satisfied  that  eternal  truth  is  perfectly  right,  yea 
jusi  as  it  should  be. 

u  For,  provided  deism  should  prove  true  in  its  stead,  what 
is  there  to  be  lost  if  Christianity  fails?  Ought  we  not  to  be 
thankful  for,  and  also  satisfied  with  the  truth  of  either?  It 
appears  to  me  that  all  ought  to  be  satisfied  with  the  truth 
whatever  it  may  be  ;  and  therefore  my  present  object  is  to 
ascertain,  if  possible,  what  truth  is. 

"  '  Did  human  reason,'  saith  he,  l  unassisted  by  divine 
light  make  the  discovery?'  (i.  e.  of  the  '  unity  of  God.') — 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  31 

1  Then  indeed  would'  all  nations,  in  all  ages,1  have  possessed 
the  great  object  made  manifest  by  revelation.'  In  answer  to 
this,  I  would  only  ask,  were  not  the  laws  of  electricity  dis- 
covered by  c  human  reason  unassisted  by  divine  light?'  Why 
then  were  they  not  known  to  c  all  nations,  in  all  ages  V — 
The  fact  is,  what  reason  is  capable  of  discovering  may  also 
be  long  concealed  from  the  eye  of  reason 

"Yours,  be.  A.  KNEELAND."' 


LETTER  III. 

Dear  Sir,  and  Brother, — As  I  have  not  the  opportunity  of 
presenting  your  third  number  to  our  mutual  friend  and 
brother,  to  whom  it  most  properly  belongs  to  reply,  I  havo 
thought  it  no  more  than  reasonable  that  I  should  acknowl- 
edge the  receipt  of  your  favour  accompanying  this  acknowl- 
edgement with  some  observations  on  the  most  essential  parts 
of  what  you  have  suggested. 

You  wish  us  to  take  it  for  granted,  that  those  parts  of  our 
communications  to  which  you  make  no  reply,  are  at  least, 
generally  speaking,  satisfactory  to  your  mind.  Respecting 
this  particular,  you  will  suffer  me  to  point  out,  what  appears 
to  me,  a  very  material  defect  in  your  proposed  method. 

Suppose,  sir,  an  argument  be  laid  down  on  which  much 
depends,  in  the  opinion  of  the  writer,  and  out  of  a  proper 
reply  to  which,  he  anticipates  great  advantages ;  he  waits 
for  a  reply — No  reply  comes  to  this  particular,  but  the  very 
same  query  which  the  argument  was  designed  to  answer  is 
still  urged  ;  is  it  not  easy  to  see  that  much  labour  may  be  in 
vain  in  consequence  of  this  method  ?  If  you  answer  to  a 
question,  stating  with  great  seeming  earnestness,  viewing 
the  question  of  importance  in  the  mind  of  him  who  states  it, 
you  would  not  only  expect,  but  you  might  really  need  to  be 
informed  what  effect  your  repLy  was  allowed  to  have  in  the 
mind  of  your  opponent.  And  as  he  might  not  anticipate  the 
use  which  you  had  designed  to  make  of  his  answer,  you 
would  not  judge  it  advisable  to  submit  to  him  whether  he 
should  reply  or  not. 

You  have  finally  put  the  dispute  about  the  necessity  of 
retaining  the  dead  languages  at  issue  on  the  question  relative 
to  a  future  state,  in  the  following  words;  ;-  If  the  opinions 
recorded  in  scripture  relative  to  a  future  state  of  existence 
are  to  be  relied  on,  as  being  dictated  by  God  himself,  and  in 


32  SERIES   OF    LETTERS. 

a  way  too,  that  was  not  mistaken  ;  and  that  the  writers  of 
the  scriptures  being  thus  inspired,  have  written  nothing  but 
the  truth,  then  I  admit,"  &c.  Now  from  this  your  own 
statement  you  will  see  the  importance  of  retaining  those 
languages  until  it  be  fully  discovered  that  no  credit  is  due  to 
these  writings  which  we  have  been  in  the  habit  of  believing 
to  be  divinely  inspired.  Your  discernment  will  at  once  dis- 
cover that  it  would  be  imprudent  in  the  extreme,  to  obliter- 
ate, without  first  knowing  that  what  was  to  be  defaced  was 
of  no  utility.  A  child,  ever  so  old,  who  should  utterly  de- 
face his  father's  last  will  and  testament,  which  had  made 
ample  provisions  for  his  future  wants,  merely  because  he 
had  not  a  perfect  understanding  of  it,  or  on  suspicion  that 
there  were  some  possible  defects  in  it,  could  not  be  consid- 
ered prudent  in  so  doing.  But  if  the  will  should  finally  fail, 
and  prove  invalid,  no  loss  would  be  sustained  even  if  it  were 
committed  to  the  devouring  element.  To  say,  the  will  may 
be  destroyed  until  it  has  been  proved,  would  be  absurd. 

In  your  further  remarks  on  our  brother's  communication, 
you  find  occasion  to  suggest  a  difference  between  the  sub- 
ject of  revelation  and  the  discoveries  which  have  been  made 
by  men  in  the  powers  and  properties  of  nature.  But  when 
you  have  contended  successfully  for  this  (which  by  no  means 
h  is  any  power  to  refute  his  argument)  you  seem  not  to  rea- 
lize that  there  must  be  as  great  a  difference  in  the  evidences 
by  which  these  different  subjects  are  communicated  to  the 
mind,  as  there  is  in  the  subjects  themselves.  It  is  acknowl- 
edged, without  controversy,  that  we  cannot  demonstrate  by 
any  mathematical  or  chymical  process  that  there  ever  was 
such  an  emperor  in  Rome  as  Augustus  Caesar,  or  such  a  gov- 
ernor in  Judea  as  Pilate,  or  such  a  man  as  Jesus ;  but  then 
we  are  not,  on  this  account,  or  any  other,  unable  to  find  such 
kind  of  evidence  as  the  nature  of  the  case  admits,  and  such 
as  is  sufficient  to  satisfy  the  candid  mind.  Should  any  one 
now  pretend  to  deny  that  Louis  XVIth.  was  beheaded,  and 
allege  as  proof  that  no  such  thing  was  to  be  credited,  be- 
cause it  had  never  been  discovered  as  the  result  of  a  chymi- 
cal process,  would  you  hesitate  to  fault  his  reasoning  ? 

Should  it  occur  to  your  mind  that  you  have  contended 
that  the  evidence  of  revelation  is  as  different  from  the  evi- 
dence required  in  natural  discoveries,  as  the  subjects  them- 
selves are  different,  you  are  reminded  that  you  have  con- 
tended for  this  only  with  a  view  to  weaken  the  force  of  the 
former,  and  in  a  way  to  disallow  its  validity.     At  the  same 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  33 

time  you  state  that  you  do  not  undertake  to  deny  a  special 
revelation  from  God.  but  "wish  only  to  take  a  review  of 
the  evidences,  and  see  if  they  are  such  that  it  is  impossible  h 
should  be  false."  Of  these  evidences  you  speak  thus  ;  "Al- 
though ever  so  clear  at  first,  and  ever  so  well  supported  by 
facts,  concerning-  which  the  witnesses  had  the  clearest  evi- 
dences, yet  the  evidences  being-  of  such  a  nature  as  to  pre- 
clude a  repetition,  like  those  respecting  a  vision  of  the  night 
or  any  other  phenomenon,  are  liable  to  suffer  by  passing 
from  one  to  another,"  and  finally  "  lose  all  their  strength." 
Here  it  seems  you  pretend  to  state  the  character  of  the  ev  iden- 
ces  of  a  divine  revelation,  which  evidences  you  wish  to  re- 
view. Permit  me  to  a,sk,  dear  brother,  if  it  would  not  have 
appeared  more  consistent  with  piety  and  candor  to  have  re- 
viewed before  you  fixed  the  character  of  the  evidences  ? — 
There  is  a  proper  order  in  which  every  thing  should  be  con- 
ducted. All  our  researches  should  be  kept  from  the  em- 
barrassments of  prejudice.  Though  I  feel  much  reluctance 
in  entering  on  so  great  a  subject  as  the  vindication  of  the 
truth  of  divine  revelation,  fearing  I  should  fail  in  doing  that 
honour  to  the  subject  which  I  am  confident  it  deserves,  I  am 
inclined  to  suggest  a  few  things  which  I  think  are  worthy  of 
some  notice.  As  you  speak  of  a  vision  of  the  night,  the  evi- 
dences of  which  were  clear  to  the  person  and  satisfactory 
at  the  time,  those  evidences  would  naturally  lose  their  force 
when  communicated  to  others  and  finally  lose  their  strength. 
Let  us  suppose  a  case.  A  man  shall  have  a  vision  of  the 
night,  in  which  it  shall  be  revealed  to  him  that  some  time 
before  the  present  generation  shall  leave  the  stage  of  life, 
the  kingdom  of  Great  Britain  will  be  overcome  by  the  power 
of  France  ;  that  very  many  of  the  flourishing  cities  of  Eng- 
land will  be  destroyed  in  a  very  awful  manner ;  that  Lon- 
don will  be  laid  level  with  the  ground  ;  that  the  distress  of  the 
inhabitants  during  the  siege  will  be  extreme  ;  that  for  some 
time  before  this  great  event,  there  will  be  wars  and  rumors 
of  wars  among  the  nations,  and  certain  signs  very  wonderful 
will  be  seen  in  the  heavens.  This  man  tells  his  vision  very 
circumstantially  and  several  persons  write  it  down.  Now 
suppose  as  the  time  passes  away,  these  events,  one  after 
another,  should  take  place,  all  in  the  same  order  in  which 
the  vision  represented  them  ;  do  you  feel  willing  to  say 
that  the  evidences  of  the  truth  of  this  vision,  are  all  the 
time  losing  their  force  ?  No  surely  they  are  not  ;  they  are 
all  the  time  gaining  strength  and  waxing  brighter.     Whether 


34  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

1  am  able  to  satisfy  you  that  the  above  case  is  a  fair  repre- 
sentation of  the  evidences  of  divine  revelation,  or  not,  it 
discovers  in  some  degree  the  ground  on  which,  in  my  mind, 
revelation  is  established. 

Compare,  if  you  please,  the  prophesy  of  Jesus  recorded 
in  the  24th  of  Matthew,  with  the  history  of  the  events  of 
which  the  divine  messenger  spake. 

Yours",  kc.  H.  BALLOU. 

P.  S.  You  have  noticed,  no  doubt,  in  a  parenthesis,  that  I 
do  not  allow  your  argument  on  the  dissimilarity  of  divine 
revelation  and  principles  of  nature  to  have  any  force  to  do 
away  the  argument  of  our  brother,  to  which  you  replied.  It 
was  evidently  not  his  design  to  argue  a  similarity  between 
the  nature  of  these  widely  different  subjects,  but  to  show 
that  no  greater  partiality  appears  in  the  divine  wisdom,  in 
not  discovering  the  truths  of  revelation  in  all  ages,  to  all  na- 
tions and  in  all  languages,  than  in  its  not  leading  the  human 
mind  to  the  discovery  of  electricity  or  any  other  of  the  laws 
of  nature  in  the  same  manner.  Will  you  endeavour  to  main- 
tain that  the  divine  economy  has  nothing  to  do  in  directing 
means  and  circumstances  to  the  developement  of  the  laws 
of  nature  and  to  the  discovery  of  useful  inventions  ?  And  if 
you  allow  it  has,  why  do  you  not  assign  a  reason  why  these 
discoveries  should  not  have  been  made  in  all  ages,  to  all  na- 
tions, and  written  or  rather  printed,  in  all  languages  that  can- 
not as  well  be  applied  in  the  other  case  ?  In  this  way  you 
would  do  away  his  reasoning  and  my  own  likewise,  for  as  you 
notice,  we  were  both  of  one  mind  on  this  subject. 

Before  I  close  this  postscript,  I  wish  to  remark  on  the  sub- 
ject which  you  have  in  view,  in  reviewing  the  evidences  of 
divine  revelation,  which  you  say  is  to  "see  if  they  are  such 
that  it  is  impossible  it  should  be  false."  Now  it  appears  to 
your  humble  servant,  that  faith  does  not  require  evidence 
of  the  description  you  lay  down.  I  grant  it  wants  to  be  sat- 
isfied and  it  has  a  right  to  expect  it;  it  feels  under  no  obli- 
gation to  evidence  which  comes  short  of  conviction ;  but  it 
does  not  require  all  possibility  to  be  taken  into  its  account. 
'1  his  would  seem  to  go  beyond  the  limits  of  faith  and  enter 
into  the  regions  of  certainty.  If  the  evidences  in  support  of 
faith  be  sufficient  to  give  rest,  peace,  and  consolation  to  the 
mind,  and  if  the  faith  be  strong  enough  to  effect  the  conduct 
of  the  believer  in  a  proper  manner,  the  object  of  faith  is 
obtained. 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  35 

The  hopes  of  the  husbandman  may  serve  to  illustrate  this 
particular.  He  does  not  know  for  certainty  that  his  fields 
will  produce  him  any  thing  ;  he  does  not  know  that  the  com- 
ing season  will  be  favourable  to  his  crops,  yet  he  plants  and 
sows  in  comfortable  expectationi  He  rises  early  and  labours 
cheerfully,  his  expectations  are  full  of  comfort,  he  sleeps 
quietly  and  enjoys  content.  But  if  you  ask  him  whether  he 
views  it  impossible  that  he  should  fail  of  a  harvest  ?  he  will 
with  but  very  little  concern  answer  in  the  negative. 

"  The  just  shall  live  by  faith,  we  walk  by  faith  and  not  by 
sight."  All,  therefore,  that  we  can  reasonably  expect  in 
the  case  before  u*,  is  to  find  a  decided  balance  of  evidence 
in  favour  of  the  religion  of  the  gospel.  And  to  review  the 
evidences  of  this  religion,  it  seems  necessary  first  to  allow 
that  there  are  evidences  in  existence  which  goto  prove  it, 
if  their  VRlidity  be  allowed.  For  instance,  the  four  evange- 
lists, the  acts  of  the  apostles,  together  with  the  epistles  of 
the  apostles  are  considered  evidences  of  the  truth  of  this  re- 
ligion. And  can  you  reasonably  require  more  until  you  are 
able  to  show  that  all  these  come  short  of  establishing  the 
credibility  of  the  facts  which  they  relate  with  apparent 
honesty  and  simplicity  not  to  be  met  with  in  any  other  an- 
cient writings  ? 

There  are  a  great  many  other  evidences  which  serve  to 
corroborate  those  mentioned,  but  if  you  can  do  them  away, 
no  doubt  the  others  may  be  as  easily  removed. 

You  will  duly  consider  that  in  disproving  the  religion  of 
Jesus  Christ,  you  disprove  all  religion,  lor  I  am  satisfied  that 
you  will  not  pietend  that  you  are  making  a  choice  between 
the  gospel  and  some  other  doctrine.  No,  the  choice  is  be- 
tween the  gospel  and  uo  religion  at  all. 

Come  then,  strip  away  all  the  clouds  of  superstition,  and 
demonstrate  at  once  that  there  has  been  no  sun  in  the  firma- 
ment during  the  whole  of  a  cloudy  da}' !  Soar  like  the  strong 
pinioned  eagle,  make  your  tour  beyond  the  mists  of  error 
and  bring  us  the  joyless  tidings  that  there  is  no  clear  sky  in 
the  heavens.  Can  you  imagine  any  thing  to  be  more  pleas- 
ing ihan  the  coming  of  one  that  brought  good  tidings  ?  But 
let  us  have  the  worst  of  it.  Show  from  undoubted  authority 
that  there  never  wTas  such  a  man  as  Jesus,  or  show  that  he 
was  a  wicked  impostor  and  deservedly  lost  his  life.  Show 
moreover,  that  there  never  were  such  men  as  the  apostles 
of  Jesus,  or  that  they  were  likewise  impostors,  and  all  suffer- 
ed death  for  their  wicked  impiety  !     Give  the  particulars  of 


36  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

Saul's  madly  forsaking  the  honourable  connexion  in  which 
he  stood,  for  the  sake  of  practising  a  fraud  which  produced 
him  an  immense  income  of  suffering  ! 

But  you  say  the  apostles  were  not  bad  men.  Very  well, 
then  let  us  see  how  good  men  could  tell  so  many  things  which 
they  knew  were  not  true,  and  suffer  and  die  in  attestation  of 
what  they  knew  to  be  false.  You  will  see  the  danger  of 
supposing  that  honest  men  can  bear  testimony  to  falsehood 
under  the  pretence  of  doing  good,  as  this  would  destroy  all 
testimony  at  once  ;  even  your  own  cannot  be  relied  on  after 
you  maintain  this  abominable  principle,  which  has  been  prac- 
tised upon  by  a  wicked  priesthood  for  ages.  H.  B. 


EXTRACTS  No.  IV. 

[The  objector  in  his  fourth  number  begins  by  explaining  himself  in 
some  particulars  wherein  he  had  not  been  fully  understood,  and  also 
by  making  some  concessions  respecting  the  importance  of  retaining 
the  original  languages  in  which  the  scriptures  were  written ;  and, 
bringing  these  remarks  to  a  close,  he  proceeds  as  follows  :] 

"  In  regard  to  a  revelation  from  God,  the  three  proposi- 
tions which  you  have  stated  answer  my  mind  well  enough, 
as  far  as  they  go,  to  which,  however,  I  would  wish  to  add  a 
fourth  ;  and  ask,  admitting  the  three  first  propositions  true. 
t  Fourth.  Is  it  reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  apostles  had 
any  other  means  of  forming  their  opinions  relative  to  a  fu- 
ture state  than  what  passed  before  their  eyes  ? — viz.  the 
miracles  of  Christ,  the  circumstances  attending  his  death, 
his  resurrection,  and  the  miracles  wrought  by  themselves  in 
his  name  V 

c<  1st.  Is  it  reasonable  to  suppose  that  God  has  ever  made 
a  special  revelation  to  man  ? 

"  You  say  I  have  acknowledged  that  a  divine  revelation 
4  if  real,  is  of  all  truths  the  most  important ;'  hence  you  cali 
upon  the  '  eve  of  reason'  to  examine  this  proposition  to  see 
wiry  it  should  be  considered  more  important  than  the  discov- 
eries made  in  the  arts  and  sciences,  &c.  I  think  these  ques- 
tions may  be  easily  and  correctly  answered.  One  relates  to 
the  blessings  of  eternity ;  and  the  others  to  those  only  of 
time  ;  hence  if  the  truths  manifested  by  a  revelation  had 
been  of  no  more  importance  toman  than  the  truths  in  natur- 
al philosophy,  reason  would  say,  God  would  have  left  them 
also  to  be   discovered,   if  discovered   at  all,  like  all  other 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  SI 

truths,  without  a  special  revelation.  But,  you  must  excuse 
me  for  not  being  able  to  see  the  force  and  conclusiveness  of 
your  reasoning,  when  you  say  that  my  l  allowing  it  any  im- 
portance at  all,  is,  in  the  eye  of  reason,  an  argument  in  its 
support.'  Supposing  I  am  informed  of  a  large  estate  be- 
queathed to  me  by  some  benefactor.  I  acknowledge  that  it 
is  very  important  to  me,  if  true,  as  I  am  in  great  need  ;  yet 
f  do  not  believe  it  true.  Now,  is  my  acknowledging  its  im- 
portance, if  true,  an  argument  in  support  of  its  truth  ?  If  it 
is  so,  the  reason  of  it  is  out  of  my  sight. 

"I  should  think  that  the  reason  of  man  (the  on'y  reason 
with  which  we  are  acquainted)  would  hardly  undertake  to 
Bay  whether  a  revelation  is  either  necessary  or  not  neces-arv. 
The  only  evidence  that  reason  can  have  of  its  necessity  is 
its  truth  ;  and  a  supposition  that  it  is  not  true  equally  sup- 
poses it  not  to  be  necessary.  For  to  suppose  otherwise  sup- 
poses that  God  has  omitted  something  which  was  necessary 
to  be  done!  Try  the  matter  as  it  respects  a  new  revela- 
tion. Who  will  undertake  to  say  that  a  new  revelation 
either  is  or  is  not  necessary  ?  No  one  who  believes  in  a 
revelation  will  deny  the  possibility  of  such  an  event.  Sup- 
pose then  for  the  moment  it  is  true;  and  something  is  brought 
to  light  infinitely  more  glorious  than  any  thing  of  which  the 
human  mind  has  yet  conceived  ;  will  any  one  say  it  is  unim- 
portant? Or  is  the  'allowing-  it  any  importance — an  argu- 
ment in  its  support  ?' 

"  I  am  very  ready  to  allow  that  a  4  divinely  munificent 
Creator  would  not  omit  any  thing  which  is  of  importance  to 
his  intelligent  creatures  :'  and  on  this  ground  1  admitted  the 
importance  of  revelation  '  if  real ;'  but  I  am  yet  unable  to  see 
how  this  is  any  argument  in  its  support.  It  seems  to  me  that 
this  argument  might  be  turned  rig-lit  the  other  way  with  equal 
force.  If  revelation  be  not  true,  it  is  not  necessary  it  should 
be  ;  and  man  can  be  made  just  as  happy  in  this  world  by 
knowing  all  that  he  can  know  without  it,  as  those  are  who 
believe  in  it ;  and  admitting  it  not  true  there  is  no  more  im- 
portance in  all  the  stories  about  it,  than  there  is  in  the  Alco- 
ran !  Now,  supposing  you  should  *  allow'  all  this,  wduld  it 
be  any  argument  against  the  truth  of  revelation  ?  I  think 
not. 

"  In  answer  therefore  to  the  first  particular,  I  must  be  al- 
lowed to  say  that  the  only  reason  in  favour  of  a  divine  revela- 
tion must  grow  out  of  the  evidence  in  support  of  the  facts  on 
which   it  is   predicated ;  for,  aside  from  those  evidences,  I 
4 


38  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

do  not  see  why  mankind  should  be  taught  to  believe  in  a  fu- 
ture life  and  immortality  by  special  revelation,  any  more 
than  they  should  be  taught  the  arts  and  sciences  by  special 
revelation;  yet  reason  does  not  reject  the  evidences  of  such 
an  event  when  they  are  made  clear  to  the  understanding. — 
Therefore,  it  appears  to  me  that  your  first  proposition  is  in- 
volved in  the  second,  viz. 

M  2d.  Is  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  capable  of  being  proved  ? 

"  I  should  have  siid  something  more  on  the  subject  which 
was  answered  in  your  first  number,  and  which  I  neglected  to 
acknowledge  in  my  second,  if  it  had  occurred  to  me  as  being 
necessary.  1  will  briefly  state  here  that  your  reasoning  on 
that  subject  is  satisfactory  ;  and  if  a  revelation  can  be  fully 
proved  I  feel  not  disposed  to  complain  on  account  of  its 
seeming  partiality.  Infinite  wisdom  dispenses  his  blessings 
so  as  best  to  answer  his  benevolent  designs;  and  were  we 
to  object  to  the  manner,  merely  because  we  do  not  compre- 
hend the  equality,  we  should  be  satisfied,  strictly  speaking, 
with  nothing. 

"  But  you  have  excused  yourself  from  undertaking  to 
prove  your  second  proposition  in  a  way  that  I  did  not  ex- 
pect, viz.  by  finding,  as  you  supposed,  in  my  words,  an  ac- 
knowledgement of  its  truth.  Here  again  I  must  confess  my 
misfortune  in  giving  too  much  grounds  for  the  wrong  con- 
struction. Lvery  one  knows  however  the  ambiguity  of 
words,  and  how  the  meaning  of  a  sentence  mny  be  altered 
by  placing  the  emphasis  on  a  different  word  from  what  the 
author  intended.  I  acknowledge  that  my  words  will  admit 
the  construction  you  have  given  them  ;  yet  you  could  but 
see  that  it  was  giving  up  at  once  what  I  had  in  a  number  of 
places,  both  before  and  after,  considered  a  main  question. 
And  then  you  ask  me  why  I  wish  you  to  prove  what  I  ac- 
knowledge to  be  true.  If  you  wiil  be  good  enough  to  review 
the  passage,  and  notice  that  the  word  substantially  was  em- 
phatic, and  contrasted  with  circumstantial,  a  little  below, 
you  will  perceive  that  my  meaning  was  simply  this.  No 
one  will  pretend  that  the  evangelists  were  correct  in  every 
minute  particular,  but  only  correct  in  substance  ;  and  by  the 
all,  by  whom  this  will  be  admitted,  I  mean  those  who  be- 
lieve in  divine  revelation;  that  even  they  would  acknowl- 
edge, that  in  point  of  correctness,  the  writers  were  *  no 
more'  than  substantially  so.     However, 

u  You  think  if  1  am  c  disposed  to  doubt,'  &c.  it  is  my  pro- 
vince to  bring  forward  my  '  strong  reasoning,'  &c.     I  know 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  39 

of  no  disposition  that  I  feel  respecting-  the  subject  but  to  as- 
certain, if  possible,  the  truth.  If  I  have  doubts,  it  is  not  be* 
cause  I  choose  to  doubt,  but  because  I  cannot  help  them; 
and  if  I  have  faith  it  is  such  as  is  given  me.  Of  one  thing  I 
have  no  doubt ;  that  is,  that  the  truth,  whatever  it  is,  is 
right.     But, 

"  Admitting  the  scriptures  are  not  true,  I  shall  not  attempt 
to  guess  what  is  true  respecting  the  subjects  to  which  they 
relate.  For  I  might  guess  a  hundred  different  ways  to  ac- 
count for  what  we  know  is  true,  and  all  of  them  be  wrong. 

u  My  doubts  on  this  subject  are  nothing  more  than  doubts; 
they  do  not  amount  to  a  confirmed  unbelief  ;  because  they 
admit  the  possibility  of  the  account's  beins:  true. 

«  Yours,  &c.  A.  KNEELAND." 


LETTER  IV. 

Much  esteemed  friend, — Your  fourth  number  is  hereby  ac- 
knowledged ;  and  though  occasions  for  rinding  fault  are  in 
some  measure  extenuated,'  it  still  appears  that  you  have  lost 
the  real  connexion  of  your  arguments,  and  have  made  the 
subject  of  the  languages  one  of  your  main  subjects,  when 
judging  from  your  first  number,  it  was  no  more  than  a  vesti- 
bule to  the  grand  edifice  which  it  was  in  your  mind  to  ex- 
amine. 

However,  you  having  paid  more  than  half,  we  will  not 
stand  about  the  fraction,  as  long  as  we  have  a  profitable  ob- 
ject in  view.  You  call  up  what  you  call  the  subject.  I 
suppose  the  main  subject.  This  you  state  as  follows  :  "  In 
regard  to  a  revelation  from  God,  the  three  propositions 
which  you  have  stated  answer  my  mind  well  enough,  as  far 
as  they  go;  to  which  however,  1  would  wish  to  add  a  fcurth, 
and  ask;  admitting  the  three  first  particulars  true. — 4th.  Is 
it  reasonable  to  suppose,  that  the  apostles  had  any  other 
means  of  forming  their  opinions,  relative  to  a  future  state, 
than  what  passed  before  their  eyes  ?  viz.  the  miracles  of 
Christ,  the  circumstance  attending  his  death,  his  resurrec- 
tion, and  the  miracles  wrought  by  themselves  in  his  name  V 
I  wish,  in  this  place,  to  show  you  that  your  added  proposition 
possesses  no  power  relative  to  our  argument  which  is  not 
comprehended  in  the  last  of  the  three  which  I  stated.  For 
if  it  be  allowed,  as  you  propose,  that  my  propositions  are 
true,  then  you  consent  to  the  validity  of  the  apostles  testi- 


40  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

mony  respecting  a  future  state,  which  granted,  it  makes  no 
difference  in  what  way  the  apostles  come  to  the  knowledge 
of  futurity.  When  a  thing  is  known,  it  is  known.  The 
means  by  which  it  is  known  add  nothing  to  either  side  of 
the  argument.  If  you  allow  that  my  argument  on  this  sub- 
ject is  correct,  as  it  seems  you  do,  then  you  acknowledge 
that  God  would  not  endow  men  with  the  power  to  heal  the 
sick  and  raise  the  dead,  whose  testimony  concerning  a  future 
state  could  be  justly  doubted.  I  will  not  be  too  positive 
that  I  rightly  apprehend  your  meaning  on  this  subject,  but 
as  you  propose  to  allow  my  three  propositions,  and  as  you 
make  no  attempt  to  do  away  my  reasoning,  especially  on 
•  i\  last,  I  think  I  should  not  understand  you  according  to 
your  own  proposal  in  any  other  way. 

The  melh  »phor  which  you  use  to  help  you  away  from  my 
argument  respecting  the  import  vnce  of  a  revelation  from 
God,  does  not  appear  fully  adequate  to  the  purpose  for  which 
you  use  it.  It  might  not  be  a  reasonable,  a  necessary  dispo- 
i  of  property  lor  the  proposed  benefactor,  to  give  you  a 
icirge  estate  ;  it  might  be,  in  the  eye  of  reason  a  very  im- 
proper donation,  and  one  which  would  deprive  legitimate 
heirs  of  what  they  had  a  right  to  expect  from  a  father  to- 
wards whom  they  had  always  acted  with  filial  obedience. — ■ 
But  if  you  will  make  the  case  a  parallel,  and  suppose  you 
are  an  heir,  a  lawful  child,  and  your  father  has  a  large 
estate  to  dispose  of,  then  you  will  see  that  it  is  right  and 
just,  and  no  more  than  what  you  have  reason  to  expect ; 
that  it  is  necessary,  and  that  this  necessity  is  the  importance 
of  the  subject,  you  will  at  once  see  that  this  importance  is  a 
reason,  yea  an  evidence  that  you  have  a  right  to  expect  it. 
I  called  on  you  to  prove  that  no  revelation  was  needed  ;  I 
acknowledged  that  if  none  was  necessary,  a  being  of  infinite 
wisdom  would  make  none.  You  venture  to  say,  that  the 
••  only  evidence  that  reason  can  have  of  the  necessity  of  di- 
vine revelation  is  its  truth."  It  is  believed,  sir,  that  this  hy- 
pothesis involves  too  much.  It  is  saying  that  reason  can 
discern  the  necessity  of  nothing  until  it  obtains  it,  whereas 
the  truth  is  evidently  the  other  side  of  the  assertion.  We 
are  frequently  experiencing  the  necessity  of  things  which 
we  have  not  already  attained,  and  by  this  want  we  are  in- 
cited to  use  the  means  by  which  we  finally  obtain  them. — 
"  Ask,  and  ye  shall  receive,  seek,  and  ye  shall  find,  knock, 
and  it  shall  be  opened  unto  you,"  &c.  It  is  believed,  and 
no  doubt  it  may  be  argued  with  success,  that  the  raoraj  aod 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  41 

religious  state  of  man  really  required  a  divine  revelation. 
Never  did  the  parched  ground,  the  withering  plant,  the 
thirsty  herds  need  the  showers  from  heaven,  more  than  man, 
that  word  of  life  which  descended  as  the  rain  and  distilled  as 
the  dew,  when  the  gospel  was  published  by  a  cloud  of  faith- 
ful witnesses,  called  of  God  for  that  purpose. 

After  acknowledging  that  }'our  words  admit  of  the  con- 
struction which  I  gave  them  respecting  the  apostles  stating 
no  more  than  what  was  substantially  true,  you  inform  me 
that  you  meant  something  very  different ;  then,  sir,  it  seems 
you  must  mean  that  they  stated  that  which  is  not  true.  And 
if  so,  why  do  you  not  prove  wherein  they  testified  falsely, 
which  would  at  once  cast  their  bands  from  us  ?  By  this 
mean  you  would  show  that  their  testimony  is  deserving  of  no 
credit. 

On  the  subjects  of  your  doubts,  you  recollected  my  re- 
quest, that  you  bring  forward  your  reasons,  &c.  But  in 
room  of  doing  this  you  inform  me  that  your  doubts  are  in- 
voluntary. But  I  wish  to  know  if  this  renders  it  improper 
for  you  to  state  your  reasons  for  doubting  ?  You  further 
inform  me  that  your  doubts  do  not  amount  to  a  confirmed 
unbelief.  Again,  I  would  ask  if  it  be  necessary  for  you  to 
wait  until  you  are  a  confirmed  unbeliever  before  you  state 
your  reasons  for  doubting  the  truth  of  the  testimony  which 
christians  call  divine  ? 

By  these  questions  you  will  perceive  that  I  am  waiting 
for  you,  and  if  I  am  not  able  to  meet  your  arguments,  I  am 
ready  on  making  the  discovery,  to  acknowledge  your  rea- 
soning too  strong  for  my  weak  powers  to  manage. 

Yours,  &c.  H.  BALLOU. 


EXTRACTS  No.  V. 

[After  acknowledging  the  receipt  of  Letters  Nos.  3  and  4,  and  re- 
marking on  several  parts  of  the  reply  to  Extracts  No.  2,  making  some 
concessions,  &c.  as  he  found  it  necessary,  the  objector  proceeds  as 
follows.] 

"  But,  your  final  conclusion,  after  all,  comes  so  near  what 
I  conceive  to  be  the  truth,  that,  were  you  as  correct  in  ev- 
ery thing  as  you  appear  to  be  in  this,  I  should  hardly  think 
it  expedient  to  pursue  this  controversy  any  further.  u  The 
christian  is  enabled,"  you  say,  "  to  hope  for  existence  with 
God  in  an  eternal  state,  and  this  is  as  much  as  our  presen* 
4* 


42  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

welfare  requires."  Most  excellent  !  To  this  proposition  I 
cherfully  assent.  Yea,  I  would  consent  even  to  pruning  it 
a  little,  which  no  doubt  would  spoil  it  in  your  view.  Instead 
of  c  this  is  as  much  as,'  read,  '  even  this  is  more  than,1 
and  your  proposition  would  stand  exactly  right.     Again,  you 

say, 

44  I  have  many  reasons  for  not  believing  in  the  general  sen- 
timent that  supposes  the  revelation  contained  in  the  scrip- 
tures was  designed  to  prepare  men  in  this  world  for  happi- 
ness in  another,  and  that  a  want  of  a  correct  knowledge  of 
this  revelation  here,  would  subject  the  ignorant  to  incon- 
venience in  a  future  state.  Such  a  sentiment  is  an  impeach- 
ment of  the  wisdom  and  goodness  of  God. 

64  Here  again,  should  I  admit  a  divine  revelation,  I  most 
heartily  agree  with  you  ;  and  also  with  the  reasoning  which 
follows  under  this  proposition.  For  it  is  •  more  consistent 
with  reason  and  good  sense  to  believe  (like  the  fool)  in  the 
existence  of  no  God,  than  to  believe  in  a  God  who  is  either 
partial  or  cruel  !  If  such  were  the  general  sentiment  of 
mankind,  the  evils  resulting  from  it,  in  my  humble  opinion, 
would  not  be  worse  than  the  evils  which  have  resulted  from 
the  belief  in  a  God  of  the  character  just  mentioned.  One 
who,  according  to  the  sentiment,  has  let  millions,  even  mil- 
lions of  millions,  of  his  rational  creatures  die  ignorant  of  a 
divine  revelation,  when  he  knew  without  the  knowledge  of, 
and  belief  in,  such  a  revelation,  they  must  sink  down  into 
eternal  ruin  and  misery  !  And,  so  far  as  a  revelation  res- 
pects the  damned,  as  though  it  was  designed  to  aggravate 
and  increase  their  misery  by  increasing  their  sensibility,  he 
makes  known  his  will,  by  special  revelation,  to  a  few,  ac- 
companied with  the  gift  of  his  holy  spirit,  through  the  di- 
vine efficacy  of  which,  a  selected  and  chosen  number  will  be 
admitted  to  bliss  and  glory,  to  the  utter  and  eternal  exclu- 
sion of  the  millions  above  mentioned  ! !  ! 

"  If  such  a  sentiment  does  not  impeach  the  divine  char- 
acter, not  only  of  partiality,  but  of  cruelty,  I  know  of  nothing 
that  could.         But,  Sir, 

64  Are  y<m  not  aware  that  your  sentiment,  as  above  stated, 
which  has  met  my  approbation,  on  the  supposition  that  di- 
vine revelation  can  be  maintained,  is  as  much  opposed  to  the 
general  sentiment  of  Christianity,  as  it  respects  this  particu- 
lar, as  any  thing  which  I  have  written  or  probably  shall  write 
on  this  subject  ?  I  presume  you  are  aware  of  all  this,  and  I 
nope   you   are   prepared  for  its  consequences.     You  have 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS,  43 

more  to  apprehend,  however,  from  this  general  sentiment, 
than  I  have.  You  have  levelled  an  arrow  at  the  very 
seat  of  life  of  what  is  considered  orthodoxy  in  divinity,  it  is 
impossible  but  that  the  wound  should  be  severly  felt.  For 
you  are  not  insensible  sir,  that  it  is  not  only  the  general,  but 
almost  the  universal  sentiment  of  orthodoxy,  from  his  holi- 
ness the  Pope,  down  to  the  smallest  child  who  has  been 
taught  to  lisp  the  christian  name, that  the  revelation  of  the  gos- 
pel of  Jesus  Christ  was  designed  to  prepare  mankind  in  this 
world  for  heaven  and  happiness  in  another.  Hence  it  has 
been  believed  that  those  who  have  died  ignorant  of  the  gos- 
pel, and  being  at  the  same  time  born  of  ignorant  or  unbe- 
lieving parents,  must  be  lost  forever.  But  those  who  hear 
and  reject  the  gospel  must  be  still  more  wretched  in  anoth- 
er world.  With  tins  sentiment,  however,  it  seems  you  have 
no  more  fellowship  than  I.  Therefore,  my  brother,  it  may 
be  well  for  both,  but  more  especially  for  you,  that  the  days 
of  rigorous  persecution  are  over.  For  notwithstanding  or- 
thodoxy will  consider  us  both  equally  opposed  to  Christiani- 
ty at  heart,  yet,  of  the  two,  you  will  be  considered  the  most 
dangerous  character.  I  shall  be  considered  the  open,  but 
you  the  secret  enemy  ;  who,  under  the  garb  of  professed 
friendship,  are  doing  your  utmost  to  sap  the  very  founda- 
tion of  the  christian's  hope  !  And  you  will  not  be  considered 
any  the  less  dangerous  for  your  writings,  being  approved  in 
any  sense,  by  one  who  has  the  audacity,  as  they  will  term  it, 
to  doubt  of  the  truth,  of  divine  revelation  !  Instead  of  dis- 
covering impious  blasphemy  in  the  honest  inquiry  of  your 
friend  as  it  will  be  supposed  you  ought  to  have  done,  and  in- 
stead of  threatening  him  with  endless  burnings  therefor  ; — 
ur  for  not  being  disposed  to  receive,  even  truth,  without 
cautious  and  thorough  examination,  you  have  painted  Chris- 
tianity in  such  beautiful  colours  that  infidelity  itself  finds  but 
little  cause  to  oppose  it.  Should  these  letters  therefore 
ever  come  before  the  public  you  must  be  prepared  for  the 
gathering  storm.  For  should  you  be  able  to  reconcile  rev- 
elation with  the  above  proposition,  if  reason  be  not  fully 
convinced  of  its  truth,  it  will  find  nothing  to  object  to  the 
principles  it  inculcates.  However,  as  this  is  not  the  avowed 
sentiment  of  christians,  generally  speaking,  you  must  per- 
mit me  to  proceed. 

"  As  it  respects  biblical  criticism,  notwithstanding  all  I 
have  written  on  the  subject,  if  the  object  is  what  you  have 
proposed,  '  to  get  the   understanding  oi  the  sacred  text,'   I 


44  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

have  no  objection  to  it,  but,  for  those  who  have  time  and  in- 
clination, think  it  laudible.  Your  caution,  likewise,  that  in 
our  zeal  to  cleanse  we  4  take  care  and  not  destroy,*  is  no 
doubt  seasonable,  and  I  trust  duly  appreciated.  Your  meth- 
od also  for  curing  or  removing  unbelief  is  happily  chosen, 
and  is  what  I  am  now  attempting,  which,  with  your  assis- 
tance, I  hope  to  make  a  proper,  if  not  a  successful  applica- 
tion. 

"  Although  the  '  validity  of  the  evidences'  of  revelation 
was  not  intended  to  have  been  granted,  as  I  have  informed 
you  in  my  fourth  number,  yet  I  shall  not  press  you  to  argue 
the  points  till  I  have  given  you  the  reasons  for  my  doubts  ; 
for  these  being  removed,  nothing  more  will  be  necessary. 
«  Yours  &c.  A.  KNEELANB." 


EXTRACTS  No.  VI. 

[Here  twelve  pages  or  more  of  the  objector's  manuscript  are  omit- 
ted, as  the  nature  of  his  arguments  will  pretty  fully  appear  in  the 
reply  ;  and  as  he  has  been  obliged  to  rescind  the  ground  he  had  taken, 
it  is  not  expedient  to  publish  his  remarks.  That  the  reader  may  see 
a  little  of  the  manner,  however,  in  which  he  has  given  up  his  part  of 
the  argument,  the  following  is  inserted.] 

"  Speaking  however  on  the  evidences  of  revelation,  you 
have  stated  some  things  worthy  of  serious  consideration  ; 
which  if  correct,  and  I  cannot  say  but  they  are,  give  me 
considerable  satisfaction  ;  and  are  very  grateful  to  my  feel- 
ings. k  It'  (faith)  say  you  '  does  not  require  all  possibility  to  be 
taken  into  the  account  :  this  would  seem  to  go  beyond  the 
limits  of  faith  and  enter  into  the  regions  of  certainty. 

"  According  to  this  doctrine,  I  may  yet,  perhaps,  be  con- 
sidered a  believer  in  divine  revelation,  and  of  course  in 
Christianity.  If ;  all  possibility'  is  not  required,  then  cer- 
tainly some  doubts^  some  possibility  of  failure,  may  be  admit- 
ed  without  destroying  the  consistency  of  the  christian  faith. 

"  Here  as  it  respects  the  argument,  you  have  seemingly 
forclosed  every  thing  which  I  shall  say  by  way  of  objection  ; 
at  least,  you  have  anticipated  all  my  arguments  on  this  sub- 
ject. For  evidences  and  circumstances  calculated  to  raise 
doubts  in  the  mind  ;  and  shewing  the  posibility  of  uncertainty, 
are  all  the  arguments  which  I  have  expected  to  produce  in 
this  case.  But  it  may  not  be  improper  to  inquire  how  much 
uncertainty,  or  possibility  of  uncertainty,  may  I  admit  in  my 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  45 

calculatioD  without  destrpying  the  christian  faith  ?  That 
there  are  evidences  in  favor  of  divine  revelation,  and,  which 
would  support  it,  if  there  were  nothing  to  counterbalance 
their  testimony,  is  a  proposition  which  I  admit,  aad  which  1 
think  cannot  be  disputed.  Hence  I  conceive  it  must  be  ad- 
mitted that  there  is  a  possibility,  at  least,  of  its  being-  true. — 
But  after  all,  if  the  weight  of  evidence  in  the  mind  of  any 
one  should  preponderate  against  it,  I  doubt  whether  such  an 
one  could  consistently  be  called  a  believer  in  divine  revela- 
tion. 

"  You  have  suggested  that  in  disproving  the  religion  of 
Jesus  Christ,  i  should  disprove  all  religion  ;  as  there  can  be 
no  choice  between  this  and  any  other  ;  for  if  this  can  be 
proved  false  all  may  be  proved  false  "Sic.  or  words  to  that 
effect.  In  this  I  hardly  know  how  to  understand  you.  So  far  as 
the  religion  of  Christ  consists  in  '  feeding  the  hungry,  cloth- 
ing the  miked,  and  keeping  himself  uncpotted  from  the 
world,'  I  admit,  that  l  in  disproving  the  religion  of  Christ,'  I 
should  i  disprove  all  religion  :'  that  is  to  say,  in  other  w  ords, 
so  far  as  the  religion  of  Christ  is  not  founded  on  revelation, 
but  on  the  relation  and  dependence  existing  between  man 
ami  man,  to  disprove  it  would  disprove  all  religion  :  but  if 
the  religion  of  Jesus  Christ  consists  purely  and  exclusively 
in  believing  in  a  future  state,  of  existence,  then  disprovir-g  it 
would  not  disprove  all  religion.  A  man  may  be  what  the 
poet  calls  '  the  noblest  work  of  God'  i.  e. l  an  honest  man,' 
and  attend  to  all  the  duties  embraced  in  that  religion  which 
St.  James  calls  c  pure  and  undehled  before  God  and  the  fath- 
er.' and  yet  have  no  opinion,  that  is,  no  settled  opinion,  in 
regard  to  a  future  state.  If  a  man  has  religion  enough  to 
be  a  good  husband,  a  good  neighbor,  a  good  citizen,  and  can 
rationably  enjoy  all  the  blessings  which  appertain  to  this  life, 
of  what  consequence  is  it  to  him,  or  to  any  one  else, what  he 
believes  in  regard  to  a  future  state  ?  This  is  a  question  wor- 
thy of  serious  consideration. 

t;  The  denial  of  revelation,  much  less  to  doubt  its  truth, 
does  not  render  it  necessary  that  I  should  do  what  you  have 
proposed;  neither  is.it  my  disposition  to  destroy  if  I  could 
the  peace  even  of  an  individual.  Hence,  I  have  no  wish  to 
4  demonstrate,  that  there  is  no  sun  in  a  cloudy  day  ;'  but  only  to 
prove  that  clouds  and  darkness  are  as  necessary  to  the  well 
being  of  man  as  clear  sunshine.  Neither  would  I  be  the 
bearer  of  the  'joyless  tidings  that  there  is  no  clear  sky  in 
the    heavens  ;'  but  only  to  query    whether    our  portion  oi 


46  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

4  clear  sky'  is  not  that  which  reflects  upon  the  earth  ;^pnd 
that  only  (.luring- the  short  period  of  our  lives?  Who  has  a 
right  to  complain,  if  our  blessings  nre  circumscribed  to  our 
sphere  of  action  ?  Must  we  enjoy  nothing-, because  more  is  not 
allotted  to  our  share  ?  It  is  very  probable  there  may  be 
millions  of  other  suns,  enlightening  other  worlds,  and  sys- 
tems of  worlds,  giving  life,  light  and  warmth  to  rational  be- 
ings like  ourselves,  exceeding-  all  imagination  in  number  ;  and 
yet,  have  little  of  the  blessings  of  those  heavenly  lumina- 
ries that  falls  to  our  enjoyment  !  They  merly  foim  a  beautiful 
canopy  over  our  heads.  It  is  true,  their  greatest  use  to  us 
may  be  that  of  which  we  nre  mostly  ignorant  ;  in  balancing 
systems  &c  but  yet  we  must  have  some  knowledge  of  those 
benefits,  before  me  can  feel  grateful  for  them.  Dost  thou 
wish  to  visit  them  ?  Dost  thou  desire  to  know  more  con- 
cerning them  than  thou  canst  know  in  this  state  ?  Calm  and 
deliberate  reason  would  say  unto  the,  '  Be  content,  O  vain 
man  !  with  thine  own  lot,  and  not  try  to  soar  above  thy 
proper  station  !' 

44  The  above  is  not  designed  as  a  reflection  ;  it  is  only 
what  I  take  to  myself. 

44  You  have  proposed  what  I  conceive  you  think  is  the 
only  alternative  to  which  I  must  flee,  when  I  give  up  the 
truth  ofdivine  revelation.  But  may  I  not  stop  to  inquire  wheth- 
er there  is  not  some  medium  between  the  two  extremes 
which  you  have  mentioned  ?  Must  1  believe  that  there  was 
no  such  man  as  Jesus,  or  if  there  were,  that  he  was  an  impos- 
tor ;  or  else  believe  all  that  is  stated  concerning  him  ?  Must 
I  also  believe  the  same  of  the  apostles  or  else  believe  them 
impeccable  ?  May  not  even  good  men  be  honestly  deceived  ? 
and  being  deceived,  honestly  lead  others  into  an  error? — 
That  honest  men  do  not  bear  4  testimony  to  falshood,'  I  ad- 
mit; neither  could  such  a  principle  be  justified  even  under  a 
4  pretence  of  doing  good  ;'  yet  I  will  not  undertake  to  say 
that  no  such  pious  frauds  have  ever  been  practiced  in  the 
world,  and  even  among  professed  christians  ;  and  how  soon 
it  was  practiced  after  the  days  of  the  apostles,  and  whether 
or  not  by  some  even  in  their  day,  would  be  very  difficult  now 
to  determine.  Neither  is  it  necessary  I  should  say  any 
thing  more  upon  ti.e  subject,  as  you  admit  this  principle  '  has 
been  practised  upon  by  a  wicked  priesthood  for  ages  !' 

44  In  remarking  on  my  fourth  proposition,  which  I  added 
to  the  three  which  you  had  proposed,  you  say,  4 1  will  not  be 
too  positive  thai  I  rightly  apprehend  your  meaning  on  this 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  47 

subject,  but  as  you  propose  to  allow  my  three  propositions, 
and  as  you  make  no  attempt  to  do  away  my  reasoning,  espe- 
cially on  my  last,'  Sic.  Here  permit  me  to  observe,  I  am 
well  persuaded  you  did  not  fully  understand  me,  whatever 
you  did  yourself,  on  this  subject.  You  will  perceive,  sir, 
both  by  my  fourth  number,  and  also  by  my  my  iifth,  that  my 
answer  to  your  three  propositions  was  not  completed.  Pro- 
bably if  you  had  waited  for  the  whole  of  mj  answer  you 
would  have  understood  me  much  hotter,  and  aUo  would  have 
seen  the  use'and  propriety  of  my  fourth  proposition. 

u  I  think,  as  you  will  perceive  by  my  fifth  number  that 
oven  honest  men  may  be  mistaken.  And  if  so.  it  r  v*  y  im- 
portant to  know  whether  the  apostles  judged  only  from  out- 
waru  circumstances,  or  whether  they  had  some  internal  evi- 
dence, called  inspiration,  by  which  they  always  know  the 
truth  of  the  things  whereof  they  affirmed.  This  was  the 
object  of  my  fourth  proposition. 

M  That  you  did  not  fully  understand  me  appears  by  your 
saying,  c  If  it  be  allowed  that  my  propositions  are  true,  then 
you  consent  to  the  validity  of  ihe  apostles'  testimony  respect- 
ing a  future  state.'  If  this  could  be  allowed,  it  might  then 
be  admitted,  that  in  this  argument  it  rmikes  no  difference 
how  Ihe  apostles  come  by  their  '  knowledge  of  futurity.'' — 
But  I  did  not  know,  neither  do  I  now  perceive,  that  my  ad- 
mitting the  apostles  to  be  honest  men  makes  it  necessary 
also  to  admit  the  validity  of  their  '  testimony  respecting  a 
future  state  ;'  unless  it  can  be  shown  that  honest  men  are 
never  mistaken  respecting  the  things  whereof  they  affirm. 
1  admit  the  ''honesty''  of  my  good  friend,  in  the  above  quot- 
ed  proposition ;  but  I  can  hardly  be  willing,  purely  on 
this  account,  to  l  consent"1  to  its  truth. 

"  As  it  respects  an  inheritance  given  in  a  will,  &c.  I  have 
some  doubts  whether  reason  always  carries  things  as  far  as 
you  would  wish  to  carry  this  metaphor  to  make  it  a  parallel. 
Reason  sometimes  moves  in  a  small  circle  ;  and  that  too  with- 
out being  unreasonable.  If  the  benefit  is  said  to  have  been 
absolutely  made,  and  reason  is  informed  of  the  tact,  it  ha«  a 
right  to  take  it  for  granted,  that  the  donor  had  the  property 
to  give,  and  that  it  is  not  given  to  the  injury  of  any  one  else. 
But  yet  he  consults  his  own  interest,  and  that  only,  when  he 
say?,  c  this  is  very  important  to  me,  it  true,  yet  I  doubt,  yea 
I  have  reasons  for  not  believing  it  true.'  Would  any  one 
sav  that  such  a  man  talketh  unreasonablv  ? 


48  SERIES    OF    LETTERS.' 

"  You  have  called  on  me  to  prove  '  that  no  revelation 
was  needed  ;'  and  have  acknowledged,  i  that  if  none  was  ne- 
cessary, a  being  of  infinite  wisdom  would  make  none.'  And 
at  the  same  time  you  have  argued  very  pathetically  indeed 
to  prove  the  necessity  of  a  revelation  ;  that  is,  if  that  can  be 
called  argument  which  grows  out  of  a  man's  own  feelings  : 
A  man,  however,  of  different  feelings  migh*  bring  forward 
arguments  equally  energetic,  and  perhaps  equally  conclu- 
sive, but  diametrically  oppocife. 

"I  know  not  what  evidence  you  wish,  or  what  evidence 
would  be  accepted,  co  prove  th  it  a  revelation  \<  riot  neces- 
sary. Even  if  such  were  the  uict,  it  appears  to  me  to  be 
hardly  susceptible  of  proof.  It  may  be  no  more  difficult, 
however,  than  it  is  to  prove  that  a  revelation  is  true.  I 
presume  that  nothing  short  of  a  revelation  would  convince 
you  that  a  revelation  is  not  necessary  !  For  who  but  God 
can  know  what  either  is,  or  is  not  necessary  for  God  to  make 
known  ? 

"  But  if  arguments  drawn  from  our  feelings  are  admissible, 
hear,  for  once, the  voice  of  simple  nature, proclaiming  in  her 
simplicity  by  every  thing  which  exists  either  in  or 
around  you,  that  a  revelation  is  neither  necessary  nor  use- 
ful. That  every  thing  which  can  be  enjoyed  in  life  can 
be  enjoyed  equally  as  well,  and  often  better,  without  either 
its  knowledge  or  belief.  That  every  duty,  either  to  God  or 
man,  can  be  performed  as  well,  and  with  the  same  benefi- 
cial effect.  And  finally  that  man  may  be  brought,  without 
either  the  aid,  knowledge,  or  belief  of  revelation,  not  only 
to  be  reconciled  to  his  conditions  and  station  in  life,  but  also 
to  curtail  all  his  anxious  desires  to  which  he  not  only  believes 
but  knows  there  is  a  natural  possibility  of  obtaining. 

"  if  one  could  be  brought  who  would  solemnly  testify  to 
the.  truth  of  the  above  paragraph,  would  you  believe  his  tes- 
timony ?  I  presume  not.  But  why  not  ?  Will  you  say  it 
is  imposible  it  should  be  true  ?  IV  o  one  can  know  this  for 
a  certainty,  except  those  whose  misfortune  it  is,  if  it  be  a 
misfortune  not  to  believe  in  a  future  state  of  existence.  If 
such  there  are,  however,  and  yet  their  lives  are  exactly 
correct,  their  examples  in  society  equally  good,  and  their 
enjoyments  apparently  equally  as  great  as  other  men,  why 
should  you  doubt  their  testimony  ?  Would  you  say  they 
were  bad  men  1 — could  you  say  they  were  dishonest  men  ? — 
and  if  honest,  according  to  your  argument,  why  not  believe 
them  ?     I  can  see  no  inducement  that  any  one   could  have 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  49 

to  deny  a  revelation,  if  he  believes  it  true  ;  but  I  can  see  a 
very  great  inducement  tor  mankind  to  maintain  the  reality 
of  a  revelation,  although  at  the  same  time  they  may  doubt 
its  truth. 

11  If  you  doubt  whether  the  human  mind  can  be  brought 
to  such  a  state  as  has  been  mentioned  above,  it  is  only  for 
the  want  of  proper  evidence  ;  the  fact,  however,  is  suscept- 
ible of  proof.  Yea,  it  can  be  more  than  proved  ;  the  happy 
unbeliever  in  idle  tales,  but  believe  in  eternal  principles, 
knows  it  for  a  certainty.  I  do  not  mean  that  he  knows  for 
a  certainty,  that  there  is  no  revelation,  but  he  knows  for  a  cer- 
tainty that  a  belief  in  revelation  is  not  absolutely  necessary 
to  a  happy  life.  Now,  if  such  characters  exists,  will  you 
receive  their  own  testimony  in  support  of  the  above  fact  ?  If 
not,  it  will  be  of  no  use  to  produce  them. 

u  In  order  to  make  a  proper  estimation  of  virtue,  we 
should  take  into  consideration  the  motives  and  inducements, 
a  person  has  to  be  virtuous.  The  virtue  of  some  men  seems 
to  be  predictated  on  the  following  principles  ;  on  the  con- 
sideration that  they  are  going  to  heaven  and  happiness  in 
another  world,  while  others,  whom  they  conceive  not  so 
good  as  themselves  are  going  to  hell,  a  place  of  never  end- 
ing torments.  On  this  ground  they  can  be  very  pious  also, 
and  do  a  great  deal  for  religion.  At  the  same  time  they 
will  tell  you,  as  many  have,  if  they  believed  all  were  to  be 
alike  happy  in  another  world,  they  would  then  stick  at  no 
crimes  to  obtain  their  object,  but  would  indulge  themselves 
in  all  manner  of  gratifications,  &c.  Such  virtue,  however,  I 
conclude  does  not  stand  very  high  in  your  estimation.  No  ; 
but  you  would  be  virtuous  on  a  more  noble  scale  ;  so  long 
as  you  can  believe  that  you  shall  have  an  eternal  existence 
with  God,in  a  happy  conscious  indentity,you  are  willing  every 
body  else  should  enjoy  the  same  blessing  ;  on  supposition 
that  this  is  true,  or  as  you  can  believe  it,  you  are  for  doing 
all  the  good  in  your  power,  and  at  the  same  time  taking  all 
the  comfort  you  can  in  doing  it.  You  are  trying  to  make 
every  one  believe  what  you  believe,  that  they  may  enjoy 
what  you  enjoy.  But  the  moment  this  faitb,  and  this  hope 
of  yours'  are  gone,  your  virtue  is  gone  with  it  ;  you  can  now 
do  nothing,  and  of  course  enjoy  nothing  ! 

"  Now  compare  this  virtue  with  the  virtue  of  one  whom 

the  christian  world  would  call  at)  in6del  !     One  whose  faith, 

and  of  course,  hope,  does  not  extend  beyond  what  he  knows 

has  been  the  lot  of  some,  and,  as  far  as  circumstances   will 

5 


£0  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

admit,  may  be  his  own  ;  and  yet  he  is  always  faithful  in  the 
discharge  of  whatever  appears  to  be  his  duty,  always  enjoys 
life,  whether  in  prosperity  or  adversity,  and  is  always,  so  far 
as  it  respects  circumstances  over  which  he  has  no  controul, 
reconciled  and  contented  with  his  lot.  He  knows  his  life  is 
uncertain,  and  although  he  has  no  real  faith  or  well  ground- 
ed hope  beyond  the  present  state  of  existence,  yet  the 
thought  gives  him  neither  anxiety  nor  concern.  His  only 
object  is  to  do  good  ;  to  enjoy  life  while  it  lasts,  to  culti- 
vate and  improve  human  nature  for  the  benefit  of  posterity  ; 
to  bear  the  evils  and  misfortunes  of  life  with  fortitude,  and 
to  be  unfeignedly  thankful  for  all  the  happiness  of  which  he 
is  made  susceptible.  Therefore  whether  his  life  be  for  a 
day,  or  for  eternity,  it  matters  not,  because,  for  the  present, 
it  is  all  the  same  to  him  :  his  duties  are  the  same,  and  his  en- 
joyments are  the  same.  O  how  happy  !  How  inexpressibly 
happy,  is  such  a  state  as  this  ! 

"  While  others  are  feasting  their  fruitful  imaginations  with 
the  idle  and  visionary  dreams  of  fanaticism;  with  a  kind  of 
chimerical  heaven  of  which  they  know  nothing,  as  to  its  cer- 
tainty :  this  man  is  in  heaven  already  :  dwelling  in  love,  he 
i  dwelleth  in  God,  and  God  in  him.' 

M  Do  you  not  wish,  my  brother,  that  you  could  find  such 
a  character  among  christians  ?  But  Christianity  does  not 
afford  such  a  character,  in  full,  nor  is  it  possible  that  it  ever 
should.  Such  a  character,  however,  there  may  be,  and 
when  the  world,  or  any  considerable  part  of  them  can  re- 
ceive his  testimony,  he  may  make  his  appearance. 

"  You  seem  to  think  it  may  be  successfully  argued  '  that 
the  moral  and  religious  state  of  man  really  required  a  di- 
vine revelation.'  This  argument,  if  I  understand  you,  grows 
out  of  the  ardent  desires  of  man  ;  which,  it  is  admitted, 
would  be  pretty  conclusive  if  it  could  be  made  to  appear 
that  the  desires  of  man  are  never  fruitless.  Man,  \i  is  true, 
rationally  desires  happiness  ;  for  this  is  essential  to  his  mor- 
al existence ;  yet,  may  he  not,  through  ignorance,  or  from 
Home  other  cause,  suppose  things  essential  to  his  happiness, 
which,  in  fact,  are  not  essential,  and  therefore  ardently  de- 
sire th:m?  But  does  it  necessarily  follow  that  the  particu- 
lar thing-?  desired  in  such  cases  are  absolutely  necessary  ? 
and  therefore  will  absolutely  be  granted?  1  believe  not. — 
And  if  he  may  be  thus  deceived  in  any  one  thing,  why  may 
he  not  be  deceived  in  the  supposed  necessity  of  a  divine  re- 
velation ?  It  is  believed  that  a  perfect  reconciliation  to  the 
present  state  of  man  ;  to  what  he  is,  with  the  prospect  only 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  51 

of  what  he  yet  may  be  in  this  life,  without  either  the  hope 
or  the  (ear  of  a  future  existence,  would  be  infinitely  better 
than  any  thin?  which  has  yet  been  produced  by  a  belief  in 
divine  revelation  ;  especially  any  further  than  a  revelation 
is  condnrive  to  this  end;  and  if  a  revelation  ever  was  neces- 
sary, it  was  necessary  only  to  reconcile  man  to  his  present 
stale  of  existence.  But  if  mem  can  be  equally  reconciled 
without  the  knon-le'/ge,  or,  wh al  amounts  to  the  same  thing-, 
without  the  belief  of  divine  revelation,  then  the  end  of  such 
a  revelation  is  obtained. 

u  It  seems  to  be  expedient  that  I  should  say  a  few  more 
wor.h,  l  respecting  the  apostles'  stating  no  more  than  what 
was  substantially  true.' 

"  I  hope,  however,  we  shall  not  lose  sight  of  the  main 
subioc*  in  debate,  by  criticising  on  words.  I  say  main  sub- 
ject here,  as  I  think  there  will  be  no  occasion  of  saying  any 
thing  more  on  the  subject  of  the  languages  in  relation  to  the 
arts  and  sciences. 

"  I  am  not  disposed  to  think,  sir,  that  you  have  designedly 
wrested  the  meaning  of  my  words;  nor  that  you  are  unwil- 
ling to  receive  my  meaning  when  it  is  fully  understood  ;  and 
yet,  having  once  explained  on  this  subject,  I  am  unable  to 
account  for  your  remarks. 

"  After  my  informing  you  that  you  had  misconstrued  me, 
and  also  stating  my  meaning,  as  I  supposed,  more  explicitly, 
you  have  informed  me  that  if  your  first  construction  was  not 
my  meaning,  it  seems  that  I  must  have  meant  the  reverse  of 
it,  which,  I  must  aver,  is  as  foreign  from  my  meaning  as 
your  first  construction  !  For  neither  your  former  nor  latter 
construction  was  in  my  mind  when  I  wrote  the  sentence  to 
which  I  allude  :  but  a  different  idea  from  either  of  your  con- 
structions was  in  my  mind,  and  was  what  I  meant  to  state  ; 
which  idea,  as  I  conceive,  is  as  fairly  expressed  by  my 
words,  and  is  a  more  just  construction  of  them,  taking  into 
consideration  the  sentence  which  follows,  than  either  of  the 
ideas  which  you  have  expressed  as  their  meaning. 

"  Permit  me  therefore  to  state  again,  that  whatever  might 
have  been  my  opinion  respecting  the  writings  of  the  apos- 
tles, I  did  not  mean  to  suggest,  and  much  less  to  affirm  in 
that  sentence  'that  they  stated  that  which  is  not  true  !' — 
Neither  did  I  mean  to  acknowledge  in  that  sentence  that 
they  had  stated  w  ho  more'  than  what  is  true,  at  least  in  sub- 
stance; but  I  did  mean  this,  and  this  only,  that  admitting 
those  things  were  true,  all  would  admit  that  the  design  of 


52  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

the  apostles  was  nothing  more  than  to  state  the  truth  of  those 
things  in  substance;  because  all  would  acknowledge  that  they 
were  not  careful  to  be  correct  as  to  every  minutix.  But,  as 
this  makes  nothing  either  for  or  against  the  main  point,  I 
wish  to  add  no  more  respecting  it,  than  simply  to  remark, 
that  even  if  the  apostles  had  gone  on  the  opposite  extreme 
of  what  I  meant  I  should  not  think  them  4  deserving  of  no 
credit.''  Supposing  they  had  descended  into  minutice,  and  re- 
lated, to  an  exact  nicety,  every  particular  circumstance 
(which  is  exactly  the  reverse  of  what  I  mean  to  state)  would 
they  on  this  account  have  been  deserving  of  no  credit?  I 
think  not.  Considering  the  time,  however,  which  had  elapsed 
after  the  facts  are  said  to  have  taken  place,  before  a  history 
©f  them  was  given  in  writing,  I  think  the  evangelists  are  en- 
titled to  more  credit,  on  the  whole,  than  what  they  would 
have  been  if  their  testimony  had  borne  the  complexion  last 
mentioned. 

"  To  close  this  letter,  which  perhaps  is  already  too  long, 
I  would  here  acknowledge  that  as  I  have  expressed  doubts 
on  the  subject  of  divine  revelation,  you  have  a  right  to  hear 
my  reasons  for  doubting.  These  1  promised  to  give  you 
(as  I  thought)  at  the  close  of  my  fourth  number.  You  have 
informed  me,  verbally,  that  1  promised  to  give  you  my  doubts 
only.  If  1  did  so,  it  was  only  a  slip  of  the  pen,  to  which  1 
am  too  prone  ;  it  was  my  reasons  for  doubting, which  I  meant 
to  have  promised  you  ;  and  in  my  next  I  shall  endeavor  to 
fulfil  that  promise. 

«  Yours,  &c.  A.  KNEELAND." 


LETTER  V. 

Dear  sir,  and  brother, — Your  fifth  and  sixth  numbers  were 
received  together,  and  will  be  noticed  in  the  order  in  which 
they  came  to  hand. 

You  observe  that  you  know  of  no  better  evidence  that 
"  there  ever  was  such  a  story  reported  among  the  Jews,  in 
the  days  of  the  apostles,  than  there  is  to  prove  the  actual 
resurrection  of  Jesus,"  &c.  This  suggestion  leads  to  the 
following  queries. 

1st.  Was  there  in  the  days  of  the  apostles,  such  a  man 
known  in  the  country  of  the  Jews,  as  Jesus  Christ? 

2d.  Was  this  man  put  to  death,  as  the  four  evangelists  and 
others  testify  ? 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  53 

3d.  Did  the  apostles  declare  to  the  people  who  put  him 
to  death,  that  they  knew  that  he  had  arisen  from  the  dead  ? 

4th.  If  the  Jews  who  put  Jesus  to  death  could  go  to  his 
sepulchre  and  show  his  dead  body  to  the  people,  would  the 
story  of  the  resurrection  ever  have  gained  any  credit  among 
the  Jews  ? 

6th.  If  they  could  not  find  the  body  of  him  Who  had  been 
crucified,  would  the  opposers  not  endeavour  to  report  some- 
thing that  might  appear  as  plausible  as  they  could,  espe- 
cially as  they  had  the  keeping  of  the  sepulchre  in  their  own 
hands  ? 

6th.  What  would  more  naturally  suggest  itself  to  the  im- 
agination of  men,  in  the  situation  of  the  rulers  of  the  Jews, 
than  the  story  of  the  disciplts  having  stolen  the  dead 
body,&c.     Or, 

7th.  Was  this  account  written  long  since  the  apostles' 
days,  by  an  unknown  author,  who  made  the  whole  story  as 
he  wrote  it?  If  this  last  question  cannot  be  answered  in 
the  affirmative  without  doing  violence  to  the  most  authentic 
testimony  and  also  to  the  plainest  dictates  of  reason,  it  seems 
to  follow  that  the  6th  preceding  question,  must  be  accepted 
in  the  affirmative,  which  furnishes  sufficient  evidence  to 
prove  that  such  a  story  was  reported  among  the  Jews  in  the 
days  of  the  apostles. 

Whether  you  are  correct  in  supposing  there  is  as  much 
evidence  to  prove  the  resurrection  as  to  prove  the  report  of 
the  disciples'  having  stolen  the  body,  or  not,  it  appears  to 
me,  that  there  is  no  proper  ground  on  which  the  latter  can 
even  be  doubted. 

Suppose  a  writer  in  vindicating  believer's  baptism  in  op- 
position to  the  sprinkling  of  infants,  should  relate  a  wonder- 
ful story  concerning  the  persecutions  of  the  baptists,  in  which 
he  should  set  forth  the  particulars  of  one  of  their  leading  char- 
acters having  been  put  to  death  by  their  opposers.  In  this 
account,  the  author  says;  Those  murderers,  after  they  put 
the  man  to  death,  for  fear  his  friends  should  steal  the  body, 
went  and  placed  a  strong  guard  round  the  tomb  to  watch  for 
the  space  of  three  days  and  nights,  but  before  the  expiration 
of  this  period,  the  guard  come  to  the  rulers  and  make  known 
that  the  body  is  gone,  and  acknowledge  at  the  same  time, 
that  there  were  such  wonders  seen  by  them  at  the  tomb, 
that  they  were  unable  to  endure  the  sight  and  retain  their 
natural  powers  ;  that  the  rulers  gave  them  money  to  report 
that  a  number  of  the  baptists  came  while  the  guard  was 


54  SERIES   OF   LETTERS. 

asleep  and  stole  the  body — u  So  they  took  the  money,  and 
did  as  they  were  taught :  and  this  saying-  is  commonly  re- 
ported among  the  Paedobaptists  unto  this  day."  Would  this 
story  appear  any  ways  to  the  advantage  of  a  cause,  with 
which  reason  and  common  sense  have  any  thing  to  do  ? 

Reason,  sir,  for  which  you  seem  determined  to  contend,  is 
candid  ;  it  readily  acknowledges  that  the  account  of  this  re- 
port among  the  Jews  is  a  true  account.  And  it  acknowl- 
edges also  that  the  truth  of  this  account  is  good  evidence  to 
prove  that  the  rulers  of  the  Jews  found  it  necessary,  in  or- 
der to  oppose  the  truth  of  the  resurrection,  to  get  such  a 
report  in  circulation. 

You  have  not  taken  me  exactly  on  the  ground  of  my  ar- 
gument, in  supposing;  that,  by  revelation,  I  mean  nothing 
more  than  "  what  was  revealed  to  me  by  the  resurrection 
of  Jesus,  allowing  the  resurrection  true."  My  design  was 
to  consider  the  three  propositions,  viz.  revelation,  the  resur- 
rection of  Jesus,  and  the  truth  of  the  testimony  of  the  apos- 
tles, concerning  matters  of  fac','rue,  disjunctively  ;  and  also 
to  avail  myself  of  whatever  might  arise  to  the  advantage  of 
my  argument  from  the  relation  of  these  facts.  All  this  you 
will,  as  a  generous  and  candid  antagonist,  be  willing  to  allow 
me  to  do,  on  the  supposition  that  the  three  propositions, 
above  named,  be  granted.  For  surely  no  necessary  deduc- 
tion from  granted  premises  can  mislead,  unless  what  is  grant- 
ed be  false.  You  will  furthermore  see,  that  by  granting  the 
truth  of  divine  revelation  some  degree  of  allowance  is  given 
to  the  probability,  at  least,  of  the  testimony  of  the  apostles 
respecting  a  future  state.  The  confining  of  the  subject  of 
revelation,  to  that  only  which  is  revealed  by  the  resurrec- 
tion of  Jesus,  seems  an  unnecessary  restriction,  which  can 
answer  no  purpose  but  to  embarrass  an  argument  which  it 
would  have  no  real  force  in  refuting;  for  if  the  resurrection 
be  admitted,  which  affords  such  an  important  revelation  as 
grows  out  of  the  fact,  it  establishes  the  general  truth  of  a 
divine  revelation  from  God  to  man.  This  being  granted, 
all  that  stands  in  a  necessary  relation  to  it  may  with  pro- 
priety, be  used  in  defence  of  any  particular  question  relative 
to  the  general  subject.  I  have  already  argued  the  truth  of 
what  the  apostles  say  of  a  future  state,  from  the  facts  which 
you  grartt.  for  the  sake  of  the  argument,  but  you  seem  to 
misapprehend  me  in  supposing  that  1  mean  to  contend,  that 
what  the  apostles  have  said  respecting  a  future  state,  was 
spoken  by  way  of  conclusion  from  certain  known  facts.     The 


SERIES   OF   LETTERS.  55 

known  facts,  9uch  as  the  miracles  of  Jesus,  his  resurrection, 
aid  the  miracles  wrought  by  the  apostles,  I  used  as  proof  of 
t'le  divine  mission  of  these  servants  of  God.  This  divine 
mission  being  proved,  gives  the  ground  on  which  I  contend 
for  the  merit  of  their  testimony  concerning  a  future  state 
You  should  have  regarded  my  argument,  as  placing  the  cre- 
dibility of  the  apostles'  testimony  concerning  a  future  state, 
on  the  fact  of  their  divine  mission,  and  not  as  you  seem  to 
have  done,  on  the  supposition,  that  they  could  not  err  in 
dr  ivving  conclusions,  &c. 

You  have  misunderstood  me  also,  in  supposing  that  by 
"  the  guess  work  of  men,"  I  had  any  allusion  to  the  known 
miracles  related  by  the  apostles.  What  I  called  "  mere 
guess  work  of  men,"  was  the  opinions  of  the  apostles  on  sup- 
position they  were  not  divinely  directed,  in  the  testimony 
they  laid  down  respecting  a  future  state.  On  this  particu- 
lir  subject,  all  you  have  said  in  reply  to  my  reasoning,  has 
no  just  relation  to  my  argument. 

It  was  expected,  that  in  relation  to  the  foregoing  subject, 
you  would  have  seen  the  necessity  of  either  denying  the 
reality  of  those  miracles,  which,  if  true,  prove  the  divine 
mission  of  Christ  and  his  apostles,  or  of  granting  the  authority 
of  their  testimony.  But  in  room  of  finding  what  was  so  con- 
fidently expected,  I  find  the  mistakes  above  pointed  out, 
which  occupy  considerable  space,  without  deciding  any  thing, 
or  furnishing  ground  on  which  I  feel  disposed  to  place  any 
argument. 

The  next  particular  which  demands  notice  is  stated  as  fol- 
lows :  "  Your  final  conclusion,  after  all,  comes  so  near  what 
1  conceive  to  be  the  truth,  that  were  you  as  correct  in  every- 
thing as  you  appear  to  be  in  this,  I  should  hardly  think  it  ex- 
pedient to  pursue  this  controversy  any  further."  You  then 
quote  me.  "  The  christian  is  enabled  to  hope  for  existence 
with  God  in  an  eternal  state,  and  this  is  as  much  as  our  pres- 
ent welfare  requires."  You  rejoin  ;  u  Most  excellent  !  to 
this  proposition  I  cheerfully  assent.  Yea,  I  would  consent 
even  to  pruning  it  a  little  which  no  doubt  would  spoil  it  to 
your  view.  Instead  of,  u  this  is  as  much  as,"  read,  even 
this  is  more  than,'4  and  your  proposition  would  stand  exactly 
right."  You  assure  me  that  you  are  in  search  of  truth. — 
Truth  is  the  only  design  of  }four  heart.  It  would  be  unchar- 
itable in  me  to  doubt  your  sincerit}'.  You  sincerely  and 
cheerfully  assent  to  the  above  proposition  viz.  that  the 
•  hristian  is  enabled  to  hope  for  existence  with  God  in  an  e- 


56  SERIES   OF    LETTERS. 

ternal  state,  and  this  is  as  much  as  our  present  welfare 
requires.  This  you  say  is  most  excellent.  But  notwith- 
standing you  cheerfully  assent  to  this  proposition,  and  can 
pronounce  it  most  excellent !  Yet  you  think,  if  the  proposi- 
tion was  so  altered  as  to  allow  us  no  hope  of  a  future  exis- 
tence with  God,  it  would  stand  exactly  right !  This  variation 
is  so  small,  this  difference  is  so  little  that  you  think  if  1  were 
as  correct  in  every  thing  as  I  am  in  this,  there  would  be  no 
need  of  pursuing  this  controversy  any  further  !  Let  me  ask 
dear  sir,  if  such  reasoning  as  this  can  promise  a  profitable  re- 
ward for  our  labours,  and  a  recompence  for  the  precious  time 
we  are  spending?  The  eye  of  reason,  I  say  is  candid  :  it 
sees  and  knows,  that  if  a  hope  of  existence  with  God  here- 
after is  more  than  our  present  welfare  requires,  such  an  ex- 
pectation is  awfully  dreadful  beyond  the  power  of  language 
to  describe.  Reason  knows  that  there  is  an  infinite  differ- 
ence between  no  existence  hereafter,  and  an  eternal  exis- 
tence. And  it  knows,  that  if  the  former  is  exactly  what  our 
present  welfare  requires,  the  latter  is  completely  repugnant 
to  it. 

With  what  you  here  contend  for,  I  will  connect  a  passage 
from  your  sixth  number.  u  He  knows  that  a  belief  in  revela- 
tion is  not  absolutely  necessary  to  a  happy  life."  By  bring- 
ing these  passages  together,  I  am  led  to  understand  what  you 
mean  by  the  latter  viz.  that  a  belief  in  a  happy  future  state, 
is  not  necessary  to  our  present  felicity.  This  is  what  you 
know!  What  then  are  you  in  pursuant  of?  You  pre- 
tend to  be  earnestly  solicitous  to  have  your  doubts  respect- 
ing divine  revelation  removed  if  possible  ;  you  call  on  me  to 
assist  in  this  work  as  if  you  viewed  it  with  deep  concern. — 
if  your  doubts  should  be  removed,  if  you  should  be  altogeth- 
er convinced  that  God  has  actually  revealed  the  truth  of 
a  happy  immortality,  you  know  it  would  add  nothing  to 
your  happiness.  Furthermore  you  argue,  following  the  pas- 
sage quoted  from  your  sixth  number.  That  this  belief  in 
the  revelation  of  a  happy  futurity  is  not  necessary  to  pro- 
duce a  virtuous  life.  Allowing  all  you  argue  on  this  subject, 
you  feel  sure  that  a  real  conviction  of  the  truth  of  the  chris- 
tian doctrine,  and  hope  of  future  blessedness,  would  be  of  no 
advantage  to  your  virtue  or  happiness!  I  ask  again,  what 
are  you  in  pursuit  of?  You  compliment  me  too  highly  in 
your  encomium  on  the  sermon  in  which  I  laid  down  that  man 
is  so  constituted  that  he  is  always  willing  to  exchange  that 
which  gives  him  trouble,  for  that  which  gives  him  comfort 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  -07 

And  you  advert  to  this  particular  sentiment  of  mine,  in  your 
observations  on  St.  Paul's  conversion,  and  very  justly  refuse 
to  allow  him  to  be  an  exception  of  the  general  rule.  But 
are  you  not  an  exception  of  this  rule  ?  Do  you  not  appear  to 
be  solicitous  to  have  your  doubts  removed  without  expecting1, 
the  least  advantage  by  it  1  Are  you  not  employing-  your  time 
in  writing  voluminously  on  a  subject  which  you  know  can  yield 
you  no  recompence  ?  In  search  after  the  evidences  of  the 
christian  hope,  you  cannot  .say  ;  where  is  that  faithful,  that 
friendly  witness  by  which  I  can  believe,  and  believing,  enjoy 
as  a  precious  reality  that  hope  which  is  as  an  anchor  to  the 
soul,  both  sure  and  stedfast ;  which  entereth  into  that  within 
the  veil,  where  our  forerunner  hath  for  us  entered  ;  which 
hope  would  enable  me  to  sing  that  triumphant  song ;  u  O 
death  where  is  thy  sting,  O  grave  where  is  thy  victory? 
Thanks  be  to  God  who  giveth  us  the  victory  through  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ."  No,  this  hope  would  add  nothing  to  your 
happiness,  and  what  you  want  it  for  is  not  for  me  to  imagine. 

You  can  employ  the  powers  of  luminous  reason  in  con- 
templating eternal  nothing  with  sweet  complacency.  This 
is  u  exactly"  as  it  should  be  !  Varying  from  this  the  pro- 
position would  need  to  be  "pruned!"  Dear  brother,  does 
reason  countenance  all  this  absurdity  ?  If  it  be  a  pleasure  to 
contemplate  non-existence  does  it  not  involve  the  absurdity 
of  enjoying  the  expectation  of  the  discontinuance  of  enjoy- 
ment ? 

You  have  expressed,  with  interjections,  the  value  of 
truth.  You  seem  almost  disposed  to  arrogate  to  yourself  a 
peculiar  regard  for  this  divine  treasure.  I  can  fancy  I  hear 
your  secret  addresses  to  this  lovely  divinity  ;  in  rapturous 
language,  with  aspect  of  eager  affection  saying  ;  O  truth,  the 
loveliest  of  all  attractions,  thou  art  balsam  for  ever)'  wound, 
p.ntidote  for  every  poison  ;  thou  sweetenest  every  biUer  cup  ; 
the  gloomy  prospect  of  living  in  thy  bright  sunshine  is  by 
thee  changed  into  the  joyous  expectation  of  soon  losing  sight 
of  thee  forever  in  the  elysium  of  non-existence  !  - 

I  will  not  burthen  you  with  further  deductions,  so  repug- 
nant to  the  dictates  of  reason;  but  I  will  cherish  a  hope,  that 
you  will  see  sufficient,  reason  for  rescinding  the  arguments 
which  lead  to  them.* 

*  Perhaps  the  reader  may  be  a  little  astonished  here,  that  the  objec- 
lor  should  ever  have  consented  to  publi.-h  argument*  which  makes 
him  appear  so  much  to  a  disadvantage.  But  an  honest  objector,  who 
has  been  so  blind  to  his  own  heart  as  not  to  perceive  the  real  cause  of 


58  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

On  supposition  divine  revelation  be  true,  you  agree  with 
me  on  the  subject  wherein  I  differ  from  the  general  opinion, 
that  a  knowledge  of  the  gospel  in  this  world  is  indispensable 
to  the  soul's  felicity  in  the  next,  but  you  are  confident  that 
this  my  sentiment  will  be  viewed  by  the  christian  world  in 
general,  with  greater  abhorance  than  even  your  own  argu- 
ments, &c.  And  you  hope  I  am  prepared  for  the  consequen- 
ces. Reply — I  have  little  or  no  concern  about  what  opinion 
reputed  orthodoxy  may  entertain  of  the  truths  which  reason 
and  revelation  harmonize  in  supporting,  nor  am  very  careful 
about  any  preparation  to  meet  the  consequences  which  may 
result  from  the  inseparable  companions,  superstition  and  ig- 
norance. 

In  my  view,  the  commonly  received  opinion,  on  the  sub- 
ject under  consideration,  is  no  more  reasonable,  than  trie  sup- 
position, that  the  happiness  and  well  being  of  our  children, 
in  this  world, depend  on  the;r  having  had, a  correct  knowledge 
of  their  parents,  of  their  wisdom  and  parental  providence  for 
them,  before  they  teefte  born.  The  wisdom  and  goodness  of 
God,  Hccording  to  scripture  and  reacon,  are  universal.  The 
ignorance  of  mortals  concerning-  them,  on  the  one  hand, 
makes  them  no  less,  and  their  knowledge,  on  the  other  makes 
them  no  greater.  We  must  duly  regard,  however,  the  ev- 
ident fact,  that  the  enjoyment  of  reasonable  beings,  is  ex- 
tended by  the  extension  of  knowledge,  which  renders  ac- 
quirements in  science  and  divinity  an  object  of  the  first  mag- 
nitude. 

The  sentiment  which  you  express  on  the  above  subject 
is  what  I  am  we!l  persuaded  can  never  be  refuted,  and  it  ap- 
pears to  me,  that  by  placing  the  system  of  divine  revelation 
on  the  ground  above  noticed,  it  is  rendered  free  from  these 
absurdities  which  have  rendered  it  exceptionable  to  the  eye 
of  reason  and  philosophy. 

The  gospel  of  eveftasting  life,  like  all  real  science,  has 
always  existed,  but  like  the  sciences,  has  been  developed  by 
degrees,  and  brought  to  the  understanding  of  mankind  as  a 
mean  of  refinement,  improvement,  and  of  conformity  to  mor- 
tal principles,  as  expressed  by  that  eminent  divine  St.  Paul, 
2,  Cor.  5,  18,  19,  20.  "  And  all  things  are  of  God,  who  hath 
reconciled  us  to  himself  by  Jesus  Christ,  and  hath  given  to 

a  perfect  reconciliation  to  the  general  providence  of  God,  instead  of 
feeling  chagrimd,  will  feel  grateful,  when  his  errors  are  honestly  ex- 
posed. Believing,  therefore,  that  others  may  be  in  the  same  predict- 
went,  these  arguments  are  published  to  the  werld. 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  59 

us  the  ministry  of  reconciliation  j  to  wit,  that  God  was  in 
Christ  reconciling  the  world  unto  himself,  not  imputing  their 
trespasses  un'o  them  :  and  hath  committed  unto  us  the  word 
of  reconciliation.  Now  then  we  are  ambassadors  for  Christ, 
as  though  God  did  beseech  you  by  us  ;  we  pray  you  in  Christ's 
stead,  be  ye  reconciled  to  God."  Now  to  suppose  that  men, 
who  on  account  of  their  ignorance  of  the  gospel  are  unre- 
conciled to  God,  who  has  undertaken  the  gracious  work  of 
reconciling  them  to  himself,  not  imputing  their  trespasses 
unto  them,  are  on  account  of  their  unreconciliatfon  excluded 
from  being  the  objects  of  divine  favour  is  a  grand  absurdity 
to  say  the  least. 

The  fact  is,  the  gospel  is  a  dispensation  of  general  favour, 
and  it  actually  "communicates  many  invaluable  blessings  to 
those  who  know  nothing  of  its  divine  principles.  There 
are  millions  of  people  in  the  world  who  are  blessed  in  a 
great  variety  of  respects  by  means  of  civil  government,  who 
know  nothing  of  the  principles  of  the  governments  by  which 
they  are  protected.  How  many  blessings  are  constantly 
falling,  as  it  were  like  a  shower,  on  our  infants  and  youth  in 
America,  from  the  favourable  government  of  our  happy 
country.,  and  yet  these  children  know  not  the  difference  be- 
tween an  absolute  monarchy  and  a  republic. 

How  many  millions  of  the  human  race  are  daily  fed  from 
the  products  of  agriculture,  who  know  nothing  of  the  princi- 
ples which  produce  those  rich  supplies.  So  there  are  mul- 
titudes who  enjoy  many  blessings  procured  by  the  gosp, 
Christ,  who  have  no  knowledge  of  the  sublime  principles  of 
this  religion.  But  here  again  I  will  repeat  the  renwrk,  that 
our  rational  felicity  is  greatly  increased  by  an  extension  of 
our  knowledge  in  the  principles  of  the  doctrine  of  Jesus, 
which  consideration  is  a  proper  incentive  to  grow  in  grace 
and  in  the  knowledge  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ. 
Knowledge  is  food  for  the  mind  and  nourishes  and 
strengthens  it  as  aliment  does  the  body.  Our  youth  learn  to 
read  the  books  which  they  are  favoured  with  in  consequence 
of  the  discovery  of  the  art  of  printing,  and  they  obtain  great 
advantages  by  means  of  those  books,  while  they  remain  en- 
tirely ignorant,  many  of  them,  of  the  art  by  which  such  a 
favour  is  put  into  their  hands.  But  still  it  is  healthy  to  the 
youthful  mind,  to  receive  the  knowledge  of  this  and  other 
arts,  and  even  to  know  that  an  art  so  extensively  u^cfnl  was 
not  known  in  the  world  four  hundred  years  ago.  A  person 
on  Being  informed  of  the  first  discovery  of  this  art,  and  of  it?- 


60  .SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

being  practiced,  in  the  first  place,  with  separate  wooden 
types,  might  be  disposed  to  doubt  the  ignorance  of  men  in 
those  times.  He  might  think  it  incredible  that  any  thing  so 
easy,  that  even  children  can  perform  was  unknown  to  the 
learned  world  in  those  times  when  learning  flourished  in  an- 
cient Greece  and  Rome.  And  1  am  of  opinion  that  many  now, 
who  are  disposed  to  doubt  the  circumstances  which  attended 
the  first  promulgation  of  the  gospel,  and  even  call  them- 
selves unbelievers,  do,  in  reality,  owe  even  their  existence 
and  of  course  every  blessing  they  enjoy  to  those  facts  of 
which  the}'  now  doubt.  Yes,  sir,  the  light  of  reason,  and 
the  knowledge  of  moral  principles,  on  which  you  feel  dis- 
posed to  place  so  much  consequence,  I  am  inclined  to  be- 
lieve are  reflections  of  that  light  which  was  the  delightful 
theme  of  the  evangelical  Isaiah,  chap.  xlii.  6,  7,  8.  "  I  the 
Lord  hath  called  thee  in  righteousness,  and  will  hold  thine 
hand,  and  will  keep  thee,  and  give  thee  for  a  covenant  of 
the  people,  for  a  light  of  the  Gentiles  ;  to  open  the  blind 
eves,  to  bring  out  the  prisoners  from  the  prison,  and  them 
that  sit  in  darkness  out  of  the  prison  house.  I  am  the  Lord  ; 
that  is  my  name  :  and  my  glory  will  I  not  give  to  another, 
nor  ray  praise  to  graven  images."  Am  I  deceived,  sir,  oris 
it  evident,  that  the  glorious  light  which  illuminates  our 
moral  hemisphere  ;  and  distinguishes  our  country  from  bar- 
barism and  savage  ignorance,  is  the  gospel  ?  The  name  of 
Jesus,  his  doctrine,  the  reformation,  seceding  from  the 
Church  of  England  and  persecution  for  conscience  sake, 
rank  as  causes  of  the  settlement  of  New  England  by  our 
forefathers,  and  of  the  existence  of  the  men  who  are  carry- 
ing on  this  correspondence.  This  is  mentioned  with  a  view 
to  direct  your  mind  to  the  consideration  of  that  course  of 
causes  and  effects  by  which  we  are  enabled  to  reason  on 
what  we  call  moral  and  physical  principles.  And  a  hope  is 
entertained  that  due  regard  will  be  paid  to  this  self-evident 
fact,  that  nothmg  ever  took  place  without  an  adequate  cause 
to  produce  it. 

With  this  reflection,  I  come  to  notice  your  remarks  on  the 
subject  of  St.  Paul's  conversion  ;  for  it  appears  to  me  that 
you  have  allowed  certain  facts  without  assigning  any  ade- 
quate causes  by  which  those  facts  came  to  exist.  You  make 
no  attempt  to  deny  that  there  was  such  a  man  as  St.  Paul, 
nor  do  you  deny  his  having  been  educated,  and  religiously 
instructed  as  the  scripture  history  concerning  this  man  sets 
forth.     But  you  assign  no  reason  why  he  became  a  believer 


SERIES   OF    LETTER^.  6* 

in  Jesus  Christ,  you  assign  no  reason  for  his  becoming-  a 
preacher  of  the  doctrine  of  Jesus,  you  nssign  no  reason  why 
he  should  so  patiently  suffer  for  the  religion,  the  truth 
of  which  you  are  now  calling  in  question.  You  allow  that 
before  his  conversion  he  persecuted  onto  death  the  u  weak 
and  defenceless  disciples  of  the  meek  and  lowly  Jesus."  But 
you  assign  no  reasons  why  weak  and  defenceless  men  should 
become  the  disciples  of  Jesus.  Yon  would  fain  insinuate 
that  what  he  relates  of  the  particular  circumstance  which 
happened  to  him  on  his  way  to  Damascus  was  a  mere  reverie. 
But  you  make  no  attempt  to  show  how  such  a  reverie  could 
produce  in  this  learned  pharisee  a  belief  that  Jesus,  who  was 
crucified  had  actually  arose  from  the  dead,  when  there  were 
not  even  the  shadow  of  evidence  existing  to  prove  such  an 
improbable  fact.  You  are  inclined  to  this  notion  of  a  reverie 
on  account  of  some  experience  of  your  own,  which  your  good 
sense  and  after  reflection  have  discovered  to  be  nothing  on 
which  dependence  ought  to  be  placed.  Sir,  where  is  the 
similarity  of  your  case  with  that  of  the  learned  pharisee. 
Do  you  really  believe  you  ever  experienced  a  reverie,  that 
would  go  in  the  least  to  cause  you  to  believe  in  the  resur- 
rection of  a  man  who  was  hanged  in  your  sight,  and  who  you 
knew  was  buried,  and  of  whose  resurrection  you  had  no  evi- 
dence only  a  vague  reverie  ?  Do  you  believe  you  ever  ex- 
perienced a  mere  imagination  which  was  strong  enough  to 
produce  the  above  belief,  and  which  could  continue  to  influ- 
ence you  all  your  life  long,  lead  you  to  forsake  a  most  hon- 
ourable connexion,  and  to  espouse  a  religion  which  all  the 
prejudices  of  your  education  opposed,  and  to  labour  contin- 
ually for  its  support  and  to  suffer  every  thing  for  its  defence  ? 
No,  you  pretend  to  no  such  thing,  therefore  your  case  is 
very  different  from  St.  Paul's. 

I  agree  with  you,that  the  case  of  this  apostle  comes  under 
the  rule  which  you  recollect  I  suggested  in  my  sermon.  He 
undoubtedly  viewed  the  religion  which  he  received  in  room 
of  the  one  he  parted  with  the  most  valuable.  And  to  this 
agrees  his  own  testimony.  Phil.  iii.  7,  &c.  "  But  what  things 
were  gain  to  me,  those  I  counted  loss  for  Christ.  Yea, 
doubtless,  and  I  count  all  things  but  loss  for  the  excellency 
of  the  knowledge  of  Christ  Jesus  my  Lord;  for  whom  I 
have  suffered  the  loss  of  all  things,  and  do  count  them  but 
dung  that  I  may  win  Christ,  and  be  found  in  him,  not  having 
mine  own  righteousness,  which  is  of  the  law,  but  that  which 
6 


62  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

is  through  (he  faith  of  Christ,  the  righteousness  which  is  of 
God  by  faith." 

As  you  promise  to  say  more  on  this  subject,  I  shall  continue 
to  expect  an  attempt  to  deny  the  conversion  of  such  a  man 
as  St.Paul  is  set  forth  to  have  been,  to  the  christian  religion, 
under  all  the  circumstances  which  the  scripture  account 
mentions;  or  an  attempt  to  show  that  such  a  conversion 
could  probably  take  plnce  without  supposing  the  facts  on 
which  the  religion  of  Christ  was  founded  were  realities  ;  or 
lastly,  an  acknowledgment  that  this  conversion  may  reason- 
ably be  allowed  as  evidence  to  us  of  the  truth  of  the  chris- 
tian religion. 

Should  you  be  disposed  to  disallow  the  account  which  the 
scripture  gives  of  St.  Paul,  I  will  ask  the  favour  of  you  to 
point  out  and  show  to  my  understanding  where  in  Palej^s 
Horae  Paulinas  fails  of  proving  the  truth  of  the  scripture 
history  of  St.  Paul. 


What  follow?  is  designed  to  notice  your  sixth  number;  out  of 
which  the  following  subjects  are  selected,  on  which  some  remarks 
are  made. 

1st.  You  observe  that  "  when  we  hear  things,  which  to 
our  understanding  are  improbable,  the  improbability  of  the 
facts  raises  a  doubt  in  our  minds ;  and  certainly  there  can  be 
no  harm  in  suspending  our  judgment,  nor  yet  in  withholding 
our  belief  until  we  are  fully  satisfied."  This  first  subject 
regards  the  degrees  of  evidences  which  are  required  in  dif- 
ferent cases,  and  the  moral  propriety  of  withholding  the  as- 
sent of  the  mind  in  the  case  of  a  want  of  evidence. 

2d.  You  are  not  disposed  to  doubt  that  many  of  the  pro- 
phets were  good  men  ;  nor  will  you  contend  that  they  were 
not  all  such,  and  taught  the  people  according  to  the  best  of 
their  abilities — And  yet  you  hesitate  to  allow  the  divinity  of 
their  testimony. 

3d.  I  notice  that  you  acknowledge  that  there  are  eviden- 
ces in  favour  of  divine  revelation,  which  would  support  it,  if 
there  were  nothing  to  counterbalance  their  testimony. 

4th.  You  hardly  know  how  to  understand  me  where  I 
suggest,  that  in  disproving  the  religion  of  Jesus  Christ,  you 
disprove  all  religion,  &c. 

5th.  An  inquiry  whether  Jesus  and  the  apostles  might  not 
be  honest  men,  and  yet  their  testimony  in  certain  cases  not 
to  be  relied  on? 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  63 

6th.  You  suppose  that  arguments  equally  energetic  and 
equally  conclusive  might  be  drawn  from  our  feelings  against, 
as  in  favour  of  the  necessity  of  divine  revelation. 

7th.  In  enumerating  the  virtues  and  enjoyments  of  one 
who  does  not  even  desire  a  future  state,  you  mention  un- 
feigned thankfulness  for  all  the  happiness  of  which  he  is 
made  susceptible. 

8th.  You  assert,  that  if  a  revelation  ever  was  necessary, 
it  was  necessary  only  to  reconcile  man  to  his  present  state 
©f  existence.     And, 

9th.  You  seem  to  fault  me  for  supposing  that  in  case  you 
did  not  mean  as  I  took  you,  on  the  subject  of  the  apostles1 
testimony,  you  must  mean  the  reverse,  kc. 

These  nine  particulars,  it  is  true,  do  not  comprehend 
every  item  contained  in  your  sixth  number,  but  I  believe 
that  a  candid  reply  to  each  of  them  will  satisfy  you  that  a 
competent  degree  of  attention  has  been  paid  to  this  commu- 
nication. 

1st.  Concerning  the  degrees  of  evidence  required  in  cer- 
tain cases  to  carr}r  conviction  of  facts  to  the  mind  ;  it  has  al- 
ways been  allowed  by  those  who  have  vindicated  the  reli- 
gion of  Jesus,  that  a  belief  in  miracles  requires  more  evi- 
dence than  a  belief  in  ordinary  events  recorded  in  history. 
Having  granted  this  they  proceed  to  associate  the  evidences, 
which  God  in  his  divine  economy  has  given  and  preserved, 
and  conclude  with  grateful  assurance  that  the  evidence  of 
the  miracles  of  Jesus,  his  unspeakably  glorious  resurrection 
from  the  dead,  together  with  the  miracles  with  which  the 
first  promulgation  of  the  gospel  was  effected,  are  abundanly 
suflicient  to  carry  conviction  to  vastly  the  greatest  part  of 
candid  minds. 

In  the  mode  the  last  sentence  is  concluded,  I  must,  in  jus- 
tice to  others,  take  the  sentiment  there  expressed  to  my- 
self; for  I  am  sorry  to  say,  that,  christians,  who  have  con- 
tended against  infidelity  have,  generally,  been  less  charita- 
ble than  the  genius  of  the  religion  they  have,  in  many  res- 
pects, most  ably  defended.  1  cannot  find  authority  for  deny- 
ing candor  to  one  who  is  unable  to  believe  on  the  ground 
of  such  evidence  as  may  satisfy  my  mind  of  a  fact.  I  will 
therefore  suppose, that  some  who  are  candid,  may, from  some 
cause  which  we  cannot  analyze,  be  unable  to  believe  the 
great  truths  of  the  gospel,  on  such  evidence  as  is  abundant- 
ly sufficient  to  convince  others  who  are  as  scrupulous  as  ne- 
cessary investigation  requires. 


64  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

It  is,  sir,  the  opinion  of  some  yery  learned  authors,  who 
stand  in  the  very  first  rank,  for  candor  and  erudition,  that 
the  proofs  of  which  the  gospel  is  susceptible  are,  in  all  res- 
pects, equal  to  what  they  could  have  been  in  any  other  way 
concerted,  within  the  reach  of  human  conception.  This  is 
going-  to  a  great  length  I  confess  ;  and  yet  1  am  strongly  in- 
clined to  their  opinion.  1  will  candidly  state  why  I  am  so. — 
1st.  Taking  the  subject  in  the  gross,  I  am  convinced  of  the 
truth  of  the  gospel  of  Christ.  Now  as  I  believe  this  gos- 
pel is  not  of  man,  but  of  God,  I  likewise  believe  that  God  in 
consummate  wisdom  has  planned  the  evidences  by  which  it 
is  and  will  be  supported  in  the  world,  until  it  fills  the  whole 
earth.  2d.  As  I  believe  that  divine  wisdom  has  planned,  or- 
dered and  directed  all  the  means  which  will  finally  ope- 
rate as  evidences  in  defence  of  the  gospel,  I  cannot  believe 
that  the  wisdom  or  sagacity  of  man  could  have  suggested  a 
chain  of  evidences  which  could  so  well  have  secured  the 
♦-.a  use  to  be  supported.  And  3d.  I  have  spent  much  time  in 
reflecting  and  studying  on  this  momentous  subject,  some 
time  in  reading  authors  on  both  sides  of  the  question,  a  great 
deal  of  time  in  reading  the  scriptures,  and  have  come  to  this 
Conclusion  that  no  set  of  men  ever  lived  in  this  world  that 
could  either  have  planned  such  a  scheme  as  the  gospel,  or 
ever  have  invented  such  a  chain  of  evidences  for  its  sup- 
port. 

If  the  single  miracle  of  the  resurrection  be  considered,  as 
the  fact  on  which  all  other  facts  relating  to  the  gospel  seem 
to  rest,  it  is  confidently  believed  that  no  human  invention 
could  have  concerted  a  system  so  well  calculated  to  secure 
the  fact  to  all  future  generations,  as  that  which  has  been  a- 
dopted  by  the  divine  economy.  Had  the  whole  of  the  Jew- 
ish nation  with  their  Gentile  neighbours,  together  with  the 
Roman  authorities  all  confessed  Christianity,  being  fully  con- 
vinced of  the  resurrection  of  Jesus,  and  had  they  inscribed 
all  the  miracles  recorded  in  the  new  testament  on  monu- 
ments which  should  defy  the  hand  of  time  to  bring  them  to 
decay,  it  requires  but  a  moment's  reflection  to  see  that  all 
this  would  have  vastly  increased  the  difficulty  now  to  prove 
that  it  was  not  all  contrived  by  man's  invention. 

But  let  us  consider  the  unbelief  of  the  Jews,  the  violent 
opposition  of  that  ancient  priesthood,  its  coalision  with  the 
Roman  government  against  the  gospel,  the  great  jealousy 
which  the  acknowledged  miracles  of  Jesus  had  excited,  the 
vigilance  by  which  he  was  watched  by  his  religious  enemies. 


SERIES    OF   LETTER  &5 

the  careful  scrutiny  employed  to  discover  fraud  in  his  mira- 
cles if  it  were  possible  ;  and  then  add  to  these  considera- 
tions that  the  miracles  of  Jesus  were  publically  performed, 
and  of  such  a  nature  as  to  admit  of  the  easiest  possible  detec- 
tion if  they  had  not  been  real  :  and  finally  to  disarm  unbelief 
at  once,  consider  that  the  ministry  of  the  gospel  was  set  up 
by  the  apostles,  on  the  bold  declaration  that  God  had  raised 
the  crusitied  Jesus  from  the  dead  !  A  declaration,  which  if 
it  had  not  been  true, mark  well,sir,  could  have  been  as  easily 
refuted  and  rendered  the  derision  of  all  people  as  any  dec- 
laration that  could  have  been  made.  But  I  shall  lose  myself, 
and  forget  that  you  have  not  yet  called  my  attention  so  di- 
rectly to  this  subject,  as  to  justify  my  entering  largely  into 
it. 

What  you  have  said  on  the  subject  of  believing  in  the 
testimony  of  David,  that  the  "  Lord  is  good  to  all,  and  his 
tender  mercies  are  overall  his  works,*'  also  the  same  senti- 
ment communicated  by  Jesus  Christ, that  God  loves  bis  ene- 
mies and  that  he  requires  of  us  the  same  exercise  towards 
our  enemies, though  perfectly  reasonable,  as  I  view  the  sub- 
ject, seems  to  call  up  the  question,howit  happens  that  thous- 
ands of  professed  christian*,  who  believe  in  the  miracles  of 
Jesus,  his  resurrection  and  the  miracles  of  the  apostles,  are 
notwithstanding,  hostile  to  this  divine  and  glorious  senti- 
ment of  the  blessed  Jesus  !  Being  compelled,  by  the  visible 
evidences  of  divine  goodness,  seen  in  the  rain  and  sunshine, 
they  advance  so  far  as  to  acknowledge  that  temporal  fa- 
vours are  generally  distributed,  but  that  God  does  really 
love  the  wicked,  they  utterly  deny.  Now  while  you  can 
believe  this  great  moral  truth  without  a  miracle,  christian 
people  in  general  cannot  believe  it  with.  You  are  not  to 
suppose  that  I  am  willing  to  allow  that  you  believe  this  sen- 
timent without  a  miracle,  though  you  would  insinuate,  that 
this  is  the  case.  My  opinion  is,  that  had  it  not  been  for  the 
miracles  recorded  in  the  new  testament,  the  truth  of  which 
you  are  disposed  to  call  in  question,  you  and  I,  if  we  had  ex- 
isted, would  have  had  no  more  light  on  this  subject  than  the 
rudest  savage,  or  what  is  worse,  the  most  superstitious  and 
contracted  christian.  If  you  have  any  ground  on  which 
you  can  fairly  refute  my  opinion  on  this  subject,  I  hope  you 
will  faithfully  perform  it  ;  if  not,  it.  will  be  expected  that 
you  will  express  your  acquiescence.  Such  is  the  power  of 
natural  prejudice  which  we  know  exists  in  the  human  mind, 
Jhat  without  a  divine  revelation  from  God,  supported  by 
6* 


66  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

the  most  evident  miracles,  man  will  not  extend  his  views  or* 
divine  benevolence  scarcely  beyond  the  rivers  and  moun- 
tains which  environ  the  circumscribed  vicinity  of  his  birth. 
Trace  the  power  and  operation  of  this  prejudice  and  you 
find  it  maintaining"  hostility  against  the  light  of  revelation  it- 
self, and  it  is  only  by  slow  degrees  that  it  is  brought  into  sub- 
mission. We  reason  very  injudiciously  when  we  bring  our- 
seves  to  believe,  that  by  the  light  of  reason  we  could  know 
and  understand  all  the  moral  truths  which  we  have  been 
taught  bj  revelation  ;  we  forget  that  revelation  has  illumi- 
nated our  reason  and  taught  it  how  to  see  and  understand. — 
Just  as  well  might  the  sprightly  youth  refuse  to  acknowledge 
that  its  mother  learned  it  to  walk,  and  ever  gave  it  nourish- 
ment and  strength  to  perform  the  exercise,  and  allege 
that  it  can  walk  as  well  as  she  can.  As  well  might  the 
learned  graduate  refuse  the  grateful  honours  due  to  his  in- 
stuctors,  and  say  ;  my  reason,  my  understanding  compre- 
hend these  sciences,  of  what  use  then  are  these  learned  pro- 
fessors and  this  college  institution?  But  would  not  reason 
point  him  to  the  condition  of  those,  to  whom  the  blessings  of 
instruction,  which,  through  much  difficulty  had  given  him 
the  light  of  science,  had  not  extended  ?  Would  it  not  force 
the  comparison  on  his  understanding,  and  humble  him  into 
gratitude  ? 

It  seems  impossible,sir,for  reason  to  compare  our  situation 
with  theirs,  who  have  not  been  enlightened  by  the  gospel, 
without  kneeling,  like  the  woman  in  Simon's  house,  at  the 
feet  of  Jesus. 

2d.  If  the  prophets  where  not  divinely  inspired,  will  you 
suggest  any  way  by  which  their  pretentions  to  divine  inspir- 
ation can  be  reconciled  with  their  honesty  ?  They  all  speak 
in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  and  evidently  aim  at  the  high  pre- 
*e».ition  of  being  spoken  to,  in  a  special  manner,  by  God  him- 
self. Will  you  say  ;  they  were  a  set  of  poor  deluded  enthusi- 
asts ?  But  this  would  contradict  your  reason  which  can  see 
in  every  page  of  their  writings  a  very  different  character. 
A  passage  from  the  1st  chapter  of  Jeremiah  is  here  quoted 
for  an  example.  "  Then  the  word  of  the  Lord  came  unto 
me,  saying,  before  I  formed  thee  &c.  I  sanctified  thee  ;  and  I 
ordained  thee  a  prophet  unto  the  nations.  Then  said  I,  ah, 
Lord  God  !  behold,  I  cannot  speak,  for  I  am  a  child  :  But 
the  Lord  said  unto  me,say  not,!  am  a  child  :  for  thou  shalt  go 
to  all  that  I  shall  send  thee,  and  whatsoever  1  command  thee 
Hon  shalt  speak.     Be  not  afraid  of  their  faces  ;  for  I  am  (vftn 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  (37 

thee  to  deliver  thee,  saith  the  Lord.  Then  the  Lord  put 
forth  his  hand  and  touched  my  mouth  ;  and  the  Lord  said 
unto  me,  behold,  I  have  put  my  words  in  thy  mouth/' 

Here  Jeremiah  evidently  designed  to  declare  himself 
an  inspired  prophet  of  God,  by  which  he  was  justified  i:i 
speaking-  in  his  name.  Now  if  all  this  was  mere  fiction,  how 
can  it  be  entitled  to  a  better  character  than  that  of  blas- 
phemy ? 

As  a  specimen  of  this  prophet's  knowledge  of  future 
events  we  may  notice  his  prophesy  of  the  seventy  years 
captivity.  See  chap.  xxv.  11,  &c.  xxix.  10,  &c.  Compare 
with  2  Kings  xxiv.  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  Ezra  i.  1,  and  other 
corresponding  passages. 

I  will  ask  you  to  consult  the  character  of  Daniel,  and  ob- 
serve with  what  genuine  humility  he  pretends  to  divine  in- 
spiration, chap.  ii.  xxx.  "But  as  for  me,  the  secret  is  not  re- 
vealed to  me  for  any  wisdom  that  1  have  more  than  any 
living,  but  that  the  secret  might  be  made  known,  and  that 
thou  mightest  know  the  thoughts  of  thy  heart."  If  Daniel 
did  not  receive  a  divine  revelation,  it  must  be  allowed  that 
he  was  deceived,  or  that  he  me^t  to  deceive  the  king.  But 
if  he  were  deceived,  or  if  he  meant  to  deceive,  canyon  give 
any  good  account  how  he  could  tell  the  king's  dream  and  the 
interpretation,  which  reached  into  the  far  distant  periods  of 
time,  and  which  has  been  remarkably  fulfilled  in  the  rise 
and  fall  of  the  four  great  empires  of  the  world  ;  and  is  still 
fulfilling  by  the  advances  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ  ?  I  will 
say  nothing  of  the  prophet  Isaiah,  who  speaks  of  the  Messiah 
more  than  seven  hundred  years  before  he  was  born,  as  if  he 
had  been  his  contemporary.  Nor  need  I  speak  of  Moses 
who  foretold  the  dealings  of  God  with  the  house  of  Israel  as 
if  he  had  lived  now  and  had  written  their  history.  But  I 
must  insist  on  your  paying  some  nice  attention  to  the  pro- 
phesies of  Christ  concerning  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 
This  prophesy  is  recorded  very  circumstantially  in  the  £4th 
of  Matt.  Be  so  good,  sir,  as  to  compare  this  prophesy  with 
the  history  written  by  Josephns  and  let  candor  decide 
whether  the  author  of  that  prophesy  was  divinely  inspired, 
or  whether  he  was  a  poor  deceived  enthusiast. 

If  you  allow  that  Jesus  Christ  was  an  honest  man  how  is  it 
possible  for  you  to  deny  his  being  divinely  inspired?  Ho 
linly  pretended  to  foretell  events;  he  mosi  surely  pre- 
tended to  perform  most  astonishing  miracles.  Of  these  facts 
Wf  have  as  much  evidence  as  we  have  that  tl 


68  SERIES    OF    LETTERS'. 

a  man.  Now,  sir,  ifhe  were  honest,  he  was  divinely  inspired 
and  endued,  or  he  was  an  enthusiast  even  to  insanity.  And 
yet  in  every  instance,  where  the  powers  of  his  mind  were 
tried,  by  the  profoundest  learning",  and  sharpest  wit  that 
could  be  brought  against  him,  he  discovered  a  mind  as  clear 
as  light.  A  volume  of  vast  extent  could  not  exhaust  the  sub- 
ject I  am  now  upon,  but  as  you  have  the  same  opportunity 
and  means  which  I  have  to  trace  it,  1  shall  insist  on  your 
treating  this  subject  with  candor  and  shall  expect  you  to  ac- 
knowledge that  Jesus  was  divinely  inspired,  or  show  how  he 
could  be  honest,  without  this  divine  endowment. 

3d.  You  acknowledge,  that  there  are  evidences  in  favour 
of  divine  revelation,  which  would  support  it,  if  there  were 
nothing  to  counterbalance  their  testimony.  I  shall  here  find 
some  fault.  Why  do  you  allow  that  there  are  evidences  in 
favour  of  divine  revelation,  and  not  state  what  they  are  ? 
Why  do  you  insinuate  that  there  is  something  to  counterbal- 
ance their  testimony  and  not  state  what  it  is?  When  an 
antagonist  finds  his  opponent  candid  enough  to  allow  that 
some  evidence  stands  on  his  side  of  the  argument,  is  it  not 
necessary  for  him  at  the  same  time  to  be  informed  what  it 
is  ?  Does  he  not  need  to  know  what  his  opponent  is  willing 
to  allow  to  be  evidence  ?  And  dees  he  not  likewise  need  to 
know  how  this  evidence  is  counterbalanced  ?  However,asyou 
have  not  favoured  me  with  such  necessary  assistance,  I  will 
attempt  to  proceed  without  it.  Bui.  here  I  must  go  partly 
on  presumption  and  partly  by  guess.  In  the  first  place  I  will 
inquire  what  particular  circumstance  recorded  in  scripture, 
which,  if  true,  would  substantiate  revelation;  and  which  yeu 
may  suppose  there  is  evidence  sufficient  to  prove,  if  there 
was  nothing  to  counterbalance  it  ?  This  I  will  presume  is 
the  resurrection  of  Jesus.  Why  I  think  you  would  be  most 
likely  to  have  this  particular  in  your  mind,  is,  because  on 
this  event,  I  believe  all  will  agree,  depend  the  validity  of 
the  prophecies,  the  truth  of  the  testimony  of  Christ  himself, 
and  the  authority  of  the  apostles.  I  will  then  presume  that 
you  acknowledge  that  there  is  evidence  of  this  wonderful 
fact ;  but  at  the  same  time  I  am  to  understand,  that,  in  your 
mind  there  is  something  to  counterbalance,  in  some  degree, 
if  not  entirely,  this  evidence. 

Having  proceeded  so  far,  I  am  now  to  guess  what  the  evi- 
dence is  that  you  think  would  support  this  all  important  fact, 
if  it  were  not  counterbalanced.  But  here  I  find  myself  in 
difficulty.     My  difficulty  is  in  finding  any  kind  of  evidence 


SERIES    OP    LETTERS.  69 

which  could  prove  such  an  event,  if  there  were  nothing  to 
counterbalance  it,  that  could  possibly  be  counterbalanced. 
Will  you  say  that  I  he  testimony  of  the  disciples,  that  they 
had  seen  the  man  alive  after  his  death  would  be  sufficient 
evidence  to  prove  the  fact?  Suppose  twelve  men  of  hon- 
est fame,  should  report,  and  even  depose,  that  the  last  man 
who  was  publicly  executed  in  Boston,  had  actually  arose 
from  the  dead,  and  that  they  had  ate  and  drank  with  him  a 
number  of  times  since  he  was  executed.  Should  you  sup- 
pose this  sufficient  evidence,  if  there  were  nothing  to  do  it 
away  ?  But  what  could  do  it  away  ?  If  the  people  could  go 
to  the  grave  and  find  the  body  there,  the  testimony  of  the 
twelve  would  remain  no  evidence  at  all,  and  therefore 
could  not  afterwards  be  called  evidence  sufficient  to  support 
the  fact  if  there  were  nothing  to  counterbalance  it.  But  sup- 
pose the  people  cannot  find  the  body,  would  it  not  be 
thought  that  the  body  might  possibly  have  been  conveyed 
away  by  design  of  some  who  might  have  occasion  to  keep  it 
a  secret  ?  But  a  guard  is  placed  to  watch  the  grave  ;  but  a 
guard  might  be  bribed.  The  one  we  have  account  of  was 
bribed,  according  to  the  story  ;  and  if  they  could  b#' bribed 
by  the  chief  priests  and  rulers,  why  not  by  some  body  else  ? 
Finally,  would  the  testimony  of  these  men  be  sufficient  to 
prove  such  an  extraordinary  fact  even  if  the  body  could  not 
be  found  ?  I  think  for  myself,  that  various  opinions  would 
result  from  such  evidence.  Some  would  believe  that  the4e 
men  had  entered  into  some  very  extraordinary  plot,  and 
calculated  that  they  should  be  most  likely  to  succeed  by 
means  of  persuading  the  people  that  they  were  favoured 
with  a  knowledge  of  this  resurrection.  Others  mi^ht  be- 
lieve them  honest  men  ;  but  by  some  crafty  contrivance  im- 
posed on.  Others  might  believe  that  the  spirit  of  this  man 
had  appeared  to  the  twelve,  but  that  no  real  resurrection 
had  taken  place.  But  I  very  much  doubt  whether  any  very 
stable  people  would  consider  the  testimony  of  the  twelve 
men  sufficient  to  support  this  fact  if  there  were  nothing 
brought,  or  if  nothing  could  be  brought  against  it.  Such  a 
circumstance  would  no  doubt  cause  a  great  deal  of  talk,  the 
depositions  and  the  names  of  the  deponents  would  be  pub- 
lished in  the  newspapers,  perhaps  for  several  weeks,  but 
after  a  little  time  it  would  die  away. 

Finally,  I  cannot  conceive  of  any  evidence  that  could  suf- 
ficiently support  the  fact  that  Jesus  who  was  crucified,  did 
actually  rise  from  the  dead,  if  nothing  could  be  brought  t«> 


70  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

counterbalance   it,  that  could  possibly  admit  of  being  coun- 
terbalanced. 

The.  question  seems  to  remain,  and  the  substance  of  it  is 
this.  1st.  If  Jesus  did  actually  rise  from  the  dead  what 
kind  of  evidence  would  his  disciples  need  in  order  to  be  sat- 
isfied of  the  fact  ?  And  2d.  What  kind  of  evidence  must 
they  he  able  to  bring  to  the  people  in  order  to  convince 
them  of  the  fact  ? 

I  will  here  suppose  that  it  is  not  necessan'  to  prove  that 
the  disciples  of  Jesus,  who  preached  him  and  his  resurrec- 
tion all  their  lives  after  they  commenced  at  the  day  of  pon- 
tecost,  really  believed  what  they  preached;  but  the  evi- 
dence by  which  they  believed  it  1  now  inquire  for.  We  must 
notice  that  the  disciples  did  not  expect  the  resurrection, they 
were  not  believers  of  this  fact  when  their  master  was  cru- 
cified. They  were  awfully  disappointed,  and  not  only  dis- 
appointed but  intimidated,  as  the  account  fully  shows.  They 
all  forsook  Jesus  at  his  trial,  and  Peter  for  fear  of  being  in- 
volved with  him  denied  being  his  disciple. 

The  evidence  then  of  his  resurrection  must  be  such  as 
will  convince  those  of  the  fact  who  have  no  expectation  of 
the  event.  We  will  now  look  at  the  account.  "  And  when  the 
Sabbath  was  past,  Mary  Magdalene,  and  Mary  the  mother  of 
James,  and  Salome,  had  brought  sweet  spices,  that  they 
might  come  and  anoint  him."  This  very  rational  account 
shows  as  plainly  as  the  case  will  admit,  that  these  women 
had  no  expectation  of  his  resurrection.  I  omit  here  what 
passed  at  the  sepulchre  when  these  women  were  there,  for 
this  does  not  rotate  to  the  disciples.  The  ftngel  at  ihe  sep- 
ulchre told  these  women  that  Jesus  had  rise;;,  and  directed 
them  to  go  and  tell  his  deciples.  "  Now  when  Jesus  was 
risen  early,  the  iirst  day  of  the  week,  lie  appeared  first  to 
Mary  Magdalene, out  of  whom  he  had  cast  seven  devils.  And 
she  went  and  told  them  that  had  been  with  him,  as  they 
mourned  and  wept*?1  This  mourning  and  weeping  could  not 
be  the  effect  of  the.  pleasing  expectation  of  soon  having  their 
divine  master  with  them;  no,  it  was  the  natural  effect  of 
the  amazing  disappointment  which  had  closed  all  the  hopes 
they  had  entertained.  "  And  they,  when  they  had  heard 
that  he  was  alive,  and  had  been  seen  of  her,"  believed  ?  no, 
"  believed  not."  After  that  he  appeared  in  another  form  to 
two  of  them  as  they  walked,  and  went  into  the  country. — 
And  they  went  and  told  it  unto  the  residue  :  neither  believ- 
ed they  them.     Afterward  he   appeared  unto  the  eleven  as 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 


71 


they  sat  at  meat,  and  upbraided  them  with  their  unbelief  and 
hardness  of  heart,  because  they  believed  not  them  which 
had  seen  him  after  he  had  risen."  It  seems  unnecessary  to 
quote  into  this  communication  all  the  instances  related  by 
the  four  deponents  of  Jesus'  being  seen  of  the  eleven  ;  his 
frequently  being  with  them,eating  with  them, holding  lengthy 
conversations  with  them,  &C  Now  as  these  disciples  knew 
that  Jesus  had  been  crucified  and  buried,  and  a  guard  had 
been  placed  to  guard  the  sepulchre,  and  moreover  knowing 
for  certainty  that  the  body  of  Jesus  was  not  where  it  had 
been  deposited,  and  being  favoured  with  his  presence  on  a 
variety  of  occasions  for  forty  days,  the  evidence  to  the  dis- 
ciples was  of  a  character  described  by  the  author  of 
Acts.  "  To  whom  also  he  shewed  himself  alive  after  his 
passion  by  many  infallible  proofs,  being  seen  of  them  torty 
•lays,  and  speaking  of  the  things  pertaining  to  the  kingdom 
of  God."  I  believe,  sir,  that  such  evidence  as  Jesus  is  s.iid 
to  have  given  his  disciples  of  his  resurrection  would  be  en- 
tirely sufficient  to  remove  all  doubts  in  their  minds,  how- 
ever prone  they  were  to  unbelief.  I  am  of  opinion  that  such 
evidence  would  convince  you  and  me  of  a  similar  fact. — 
Two  questions  are  here  necessary.  1st.  Can  we  conceive 
how  the  evidence  could  have  been  less  without  being  in- 
sufficient ?  And  2d.  Can  we  conceive  how  it  could  have 
been  stronger  ?  1  will  not  take  up  time  to  argue  these  ques- 
tions, I  feel  satisfied  on  them  myself.  I  will  now  ask  wheth- 
er we  can  imagine  the  possibility  of  any  evidence  that  could 
counterbalance  toe  evidence  of  the  resurrection  in  ihe 
minds  of  the  disciples  ?  Thus  we  are  brought  to  the  sug- 
gestion, that  any  evidence  which  could  be  sufficient  to  prove 
such  a  fact,  if  no  evidence  appeared  against  it,  must  be  such 
as  admits  of  no  refutation. 

You  will  not  forget,  and  think  that  I  have  been  endeav- 
ouring to  prove  the  resurrection  of  Jesus,  or  that  the  disci- 
ples even  believed  it;  all  I  have  been  seeking  for  is  that 
kind  of  evidence  which  would  be  necessary  to  prove  to  the 
disciples  such  a  fact,  and  to  show  that  such  evidence  cannot 
admit  of  refutation.  However,  you  will  at  once  see,  that, 
allowing  our  reasoning  to  be  correct,  and  allowing  the  dis- 
ciples did  really  believe  the  resurrection,  either  of  which, 
I  do  not  believe  you  will  undertake  to  dispute,  the  resurrec- 
tion is  proved  beyond  all  contradiction. 

2d.  Let  us  now  inquire  what  kind  of  evidence  was  neces- 
sary for  the  disciples  of  Jesus  to  bring  to  the  people,  in  or- 
der  to  convince  them  of  this  all-important, fact  on  which  the 


72  T-1KS   OF    LETTERS. 

whole  scheme  and  ministry  of  the  gospel  rested.  It  seems 
that  the  disciples  did  not  believe  on  the  testimony  of  others, 
though  of  their  own  intimate  acquaintance, persons  in  whom 
they  would  place  ns  much  confidence  as  in  any  in  the  world, 
no  doubt.  Of  course,  they  could  not  expect  other  people, 
who  had  not  been  the  disciples  of  Jesus,  would  believe  in 
his  resurrection  on  their  testimony.  The  evidence  which  the 
disciples  had  was  sufficient  for  them,  but  their  testimony 
would  surely  be  much  less  ;  and  any  thing  less  would  be  in- 
sufficient as  before  stated. 

We  will  now  have  recourse  to  the  account.  But  first  let 
ns  notice,  that  we  are  not  endeavouring-  to  prove  that  the 
disciples  ever  persuaded  any  to  believe  in  the  resurrection 
of  Jesus  ;  this  is,  as  it  must  be,  considered  a  fact,  not  disput- 
ed. The  question  is  by  what  evidence  did  the  apostles  con- 
vince thousands  of  the  people  in  Jerusalem  and  its  vicinity, 
that  Jesus  who  was  publicly  executed,  was  not  only  the  true 
Messiah  promised  in  the  law  and  prophets,  but  that  he  had 
actually  arose  from  the  dead  and  ascended  into  heaven. 
Before  Jesus  ascended,  he,  after  saying  many  other  things  to 
his  disciples  who  were  together  in  the  city  of  Jerusalem, 
said  to  them  ;  "  Thus  it  is  written,  and  thus  it  behoveth 
Christ,  to  suffer,  and  to  rise  from  the  dead  the  third  day  : 
and  that  repentance  and  remission  of  sins  should  be  preach- 
ed in  his  name  among  all  nations,  beginning  at  Jerusalem. 
And  ye  are  witnesses  of  these  tilings.  And  behold,  I  send 
the  promise  of  my  father  upon  you  :  but  tarry  ye  in  the  city 
of  Jerusalem  until  ye  be  endued  with  power  from  on  high.'" 
See  the  same  account  in  Acts,  "  But  ye  shall  receive  power, 
after  that  the  Holy  Ghost  is  come  upon  you  :  and  ye  shall  he 
witnesses  unto  me,  both  in  Jerusalem,  and  in  all  Judea,  and 
in  Samaria,  and  unto  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth."  Ac- 
cording to  this  account,  Jesus  did  not  direct  his  disciples  to 
undertake  to  convince  the  people  by  their  testimony,  but 
charged  them  to  wait  for  divine  power.  Accordingly  they 
aid  wait.  Now  look  at  the  account  which  we  have,  of  what 
took  place  on  the  day  of  pentecost.  I  will  not  mutilate  this 
account  by  quoting  parts,  there  is  no  need  of  quoting  what 
you  have  perfectly  in  your  memory.  Take  particular  no- 
tice of  what  Peter  said  to  the  people  who  had  been  accessa- 
ry to  the  crucifixion  of  Jesus.  He  who  was  so  intimidated 
as  to  deny  Christ,  now  stands  in  the  midst  of  the  people  and 
boldly  asserts,  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  a  man  approved 
of  God  among  them   by  miracles  and  wonders,  and  signs 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  73 

which  God  did  by  him,  among  them  ;  and  that  they  knew 
this  to  be  the  case.  He  further  tells  them  that  they  had, 
with  wicked  hands  crucified  and  slain  this  man  who  was  thus 
approved  of  God.  And  he  assured  the  whole  house  of  Is- 
rael, that  God  had  made  this  same  Jesus  whom  they  had 
crucified  both  Lord  and  Christ.  He  moreover  boldly  de- 
clared that  God  had  raised  Jesus  from  the  dead.  Now  add 
to  the  testimony  of  Peter,  the  astonishing:  manifestation  of 
the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  described  in  th^  account, 
and  you  have  the  evidence  by  which  about  three  thousand 
souls  were  convinced  of  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  in  one 
day.  Here  let  us  consider;  the  people  had  been  acquaint- 
ed with  Jesus,  and  had  been  eye  witnesses  of  his  miracles  ; 
many  of  them  were  personally  acquainted  with  Lazarus 
whom  Jesus  raised  from  the  dead.  They  had  been,  many 
of  them  fed  by  his  miracles  and  had  seen  his  wonderful 
works.  Now  put  all  together  and  it  is  evident  that  they 
had  sufficient  reason  to  believe.  I  cannot  conceive  how  rea- 
sonable people  in  the  candid  exercise  of  their  judgments, 
could  avoid  believing. 

Look,  sir,  at  the  account  of  the  miraculous  cure  of  the 
lame  man,  who  lay  at  the  gate  of  the  temple.  Notice  the 
wordlf  used  to  effect  it.  "  In  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  of 
Nazareth,  rise  up  and  walk."  "  And  all  the  people  saw  him 
walking  and  praising  God  :  and  they  knew  that  it  was  he  who 
sat  for  alms  at  the  beautiful  gate  of  the  temple."  Hear 
what  Peter  says  to  the  wondering  multitude  on  this  occasion. 
M  Ye  men  of  Israel,  why  marvel  ye  at  this  ?  or  why  look  ye 
so  earnestly  on  us,  as  though  by  our  own  power  or  holiness 
we  had  made  this  man  to  walk  ?  The  God  of  Abraham,  and 
of  Isaac,  and  of  Jacob,  the  God  of  our  fathers,  hath  glorified 
his  son  Jesus  ;  whom  ye  delivered  up,  and  denied  him  in  the 
presence  of  Pilate,  when  he  was  determined  to  let  him  go. 
But  ye  denied  the  holy  one  and  the  just,  and  desired  a  mur- 
derer to  be  granted  unto  you  ;  and  killed  the  prince  of  life, 
whom  God  hath  raised  from  the  dead  :  whereof  we  are  witnes- 
ses. And  his  name,  through  faith  in  his  name,  hath  made  this 
man  strong,  whom  ye  see  and  know  :  yea,  and  the  faith 
which  is  by  him  hath  given  him  this  perfect  soundness  in 
the  presence  of  you  all."  Here  we  have  the  evidence  by 
which  about  five  thousand  men,  besides  women,  believed — 
that  is,  owned  their  belief.  When  the  high  priest  and  oth- 
ers called  Peter  and  John  before  tliem,  and  demanded,  by 
what  power,  or  by  what  name  they  had  done  this  thing,  Pe- 
7 


74  SERIES.  OF    LETTERS. 

ter  answers,  filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit;  "  Ye  rulers  of  the 
people,  and  elders  of  Israel,  if  we  this  day  be  examined  of 
the  good  deed  done  to  the  impotent  man,  by  what  means  he 
is  made  whole  :  be  it  known  unto  you  all,  and  to  all  the  peo- 
ple of  Israel,  that  by  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  of  Nazareth, 
whom  ye  crucified,  whom  God  raised  from  the  dead,  even 
by  him  doth  this  man  stand  here  before  you  whole.  This 
is  the  stone  which  was  set  at  naught  by  you  builders."  Hear 
what  these  rulers  say  when  Peter  and  John  were  sent  aside. 
"  What  shall  we  do  to  these  men  ?  for  that  indeed  a  notable 
miracle  hath  been  done  by  them  is  manifest  to  all  them  that 
dwell  in  Jerusalem  ;  and  we  cannot  deny  it." 

Such  evidence  as  we  have  noticed,  which  the  disciples 
were  enabled  to  bring  to  the  people,  of  the  resurrection  of 
Jesus,  was  sufficient  to  remove  every  reasonable  doubt  and 
to  bring  over  to  this  faith,  those  who  had  been  his  murderers. 

I  will  now  inquire  whether  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose 
that  less  evidence  would  have  effected  such  conviction? — 
And  on  the  other  hand,  I  will  ask  whether  stronger  proof 
could  in  the  nature  of  things  be  given  ?  And  lastly,  to  come 
to  our  object  again,  does  such  evidence  possibly  admit  of  be- 
ing counterbalanced  ?  I  understand  that  these  questions  ad- 
mit of  no  other  answers  than  such  as  go  to  show,  that  i£lhere 
be  any  evidence  of  the  resurrection  of  Jesus,  sufficient  to 
support  it,  if  there  were  no  evidence  to  counterbalance  it, 
such  evidence  is  not  capable  of  being  counterbalanced. — 
You  will  perceive  that  our  reasoning  must  issue  in  the  truth 
of  the  resurrection,  unless  we  assume  the  extravagant  no- 
tion, that  the  people  who  lived  in  Jerusalem  and  its  vicinity, 
at  the  time  of  the  crucifiction  of  Jesus,  were  not  brought 
over  to  believe  it. 

It  is  hoped  that  no  objection  will  be  brought  from  the  cir- 
cumstance of  the  rejection  of  the  gospel  by  the  rulers  of  the 
Jews,  and  by  the  major  part  of  that  hierarchy,  as  long  as  it 
is  perfectly  evident  that  their  opposition  and  unbelief  were 
indispensably  necessary  for  the  fulfilling  of  the  prophecies, 
for  the  carrying  of  conviction  to  the  Gentiles,  and  for  the 
purpose  of  perpetuating  the  necessary  evidences  on  which 
we,  at  this  day,  must  rest  our  belief  of  this  religion. 

4th.  You  hardly  know  how  to  understand  me  when  I  sug- 
gest, that  in  disproving  the  religion  of  Jesus  Christ,  you  dis- 
prove all  religion,  &,c.  I  think  I  added,  that  there  is  no 
choosing  between  this  religion  and  some  other,  we  must 
have  this,  or  none. 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  /O 

By  the  religion  of  Jesus  Christ,  I  m?an  to  comprehend  all 
that  the  doctrine  of  the  scriptures  encourage  us  to  believe  in 
and  hope  for,  an'1  also  all  that  this  doctrine  requires,  also  all 
that  it  te.xhes  us  to  expect  as  resulting  from  obedience  and 
disobedience.  1  am  fully  persuaded  that  you  never  can  dis- 
prove this  religion,  so  as  to  flo  away  its  effects  on  your  own 
mind.  Its  maxims  contain  nil  the  morality  you  know  of,  and 
all  that  a  Deist  calls  natural  religion,  he  has  been  taught 
from  the  revealed  wisdom  of  God.  The  further  you  ad- 
vance into  the  society  of  man,  where  the  light  of  the  holy 
scriptures  has  least  extended,  so  much  the  more  do  you  lose 
si^ht  of  the  moral  virtues;  and  so  much  the  more  do  you 
lose  sight  of  the  simple  unity  and  divine  benevolence  of 
God. 

My  meaning,  sir,  however,  was  not  very  extensive.  It 
was  to  say,  as  in7a  familiar  conversation,  I  might  express 
myself  as  follows  ^Brother,  if  we  disprove  the  religion  of 
Jesus  Christ,  that  is,  if  we  give  up  our  present  belief,  there 
is  no  other  religion,  that  w<*  have  heard  of,  that  can  have  the 
least  claim  to  our  belief.  Judaism,  Paganism,  Mahomcdan- 
ism,  could  neither  of  them  have  any  claims;  nor  in  fact 
could  what  people  call  Deism,  or  the  belief  in  one  God.  If 
you^lay  there  is  certainly  demonstrated  in  the  very  nature 
of  things  an  eternal  unchangeable  princinle  or  law  which 
governs  all  tt  ings  ;  I  will  answer,  I  am  surprised  to  hear  a 
rational  being,  who  cannot  remember  forty-five  of  our  short 
years,  and  knows  not  that  he  shall  live  in  the  world  another 
hour,  talk  about  eternal  things,  use  great  swelling  words 
of  vanity  about  unchangeabilily,  and  yet  deny  that  God  has 
made  a  revelation  to  man  !  1  am  really  of  the  sentiment 
expressed  by  him  who  is  justly  styled  the  light  of  the  wrorld, 
who  said  u  No  man  knoweth  the  Father  save  the  Son,  and 
he  to  whom  the  Son  revealeth  him." 

5th.  You  seem  to  inquire  whether  Jesus  and  his  apostles 
might  not  be  honest  men  ;  and  yet  their  testimony,  concern- 
ing a  future  state  he  erroneous.  Answer,  this  case  comes 
into  the  same  argument  as  the  case  of  the  prophets,  to  which 
attention  has  been  paid.  We  have  no  more  reason  to  be- 
lieve that  Jesus  and  his  apostles  were  honest  men,  than  we 
have  to  believe  that  they  pretended  to  divine  inspiration, 
and  to  the  power  of  working  many  very  astonishing  mira- 
cles. It  does  not  appear  reasonable  to  suppose  that  these 
servants  of  God,  thought  they  could,  and  did  heal  the  sick 
and  raise  the  dead,  when  in  fact  they  could  do  no  such  thing. 


76  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

Therefore,  if  they  pretended  to  do  such  things  and  did  them 
not,  they  were  all  impostors,  and  surely  deserve  no  better 
appellation.  Now  if  i  can  bring  to  your  mind  my  inference, 
it  is  this.  God  would  not  endue  Jesus  Christ  and  his  apos- 
tles with  power  to  work  miracles,  by  which  the  attention  of 
the  people  would  be  drawn  to  them  and  by  which  they  would 
naturally  be  led  to  place  confidence  in  their  testimony,  and 
yet  leave  them  in  the  dark  concerning  those  things  of  which 
they  speak  to  the  people. 

What  you  say  on  this  subject,  indicates  that  you  did  not 
understand  me  to  infer  the  validity  of  the  apostles'  testimo- 
ny concerning  a  future  state,  from  any  higher  authority  than 
their  simple  honesty  unconnected  with  the  other  part  of  the 
argument,  which  was  as  plainly  set  forth  in  my  former  com- 
munication as  you  will  now  find  it  in  this. 

6th.  You  suppose  that  arguments  coolly  energetic,  and 
equally  conclusive  might  be  drawn  from  our  feelings,  against, 
as  in  favour  of  the  necessity  of  divine  revelation. 

Though  I  am  not  of  your  opinion,  yet  I  am  disposed  to 
think  that  desires  very  fervent  may  in  soma  instances  exer- 
cise the  human  heart  against  the  knowledge  of  divine  tru^i. 
But,  sir,  this  is  the  effect  of  moral  disease,  not  of  a  sjred 
mind.  A  foul  stomach  will  nauseate  at  the  sight  of  \dLple- 
some  food  ;  distempered  eyes  are  rendered  painful  by  the 
rays  of  light ;  one  whose  deeds  are  evil  loves  darkness  for 
this  very  reason.  Now  that  people  affected  with  these  in- 
firmities should  be  exercised  with  fervent  desires  to  avoid 
what  gives  them  uneasiness  is  surely  very  natural ;  but  that 
a  person  in  health  and  having  good  exercise  should  loathe 
that  which  is  good  and  nourishing,  that  one  who  has  sound 
eyes  should  dislike  the  enlivening  beams  of  the  sun,  or  that 
one  whose  works  are  wrought  in  God,  should  love  darkness 
rather  than  light  is  not  reasonable. 

You  are  cautioned  against  supposing  that  these  remarks 
are  designed  to  be  applied  to  yourself,  for  I  bear  you  record 
that  your  exertions  and  assiduity  for  the  attainment  of  true 
knowledge  have  been  laudable,  and  worthy  ef  imitation. 
But  all  this  only  proves  to  me  that  your  reasoning  is  unnat- 
ural, and  that  no  man  would  be  more  rejoiced  to  know  the 
truth  of  divine  revelation  than  yourself. 

7th.  That  a  person  who  does  not  even  desire  a  future 
existence  should  realize  the  goodness  of  the  divine  Be- 
ing, and  feel  truly  grateful  for  all  enjoyments  does  not 
staed   in  a  clear    light  in  my  mind.      1  cannot   conceive 


SERIES    OF    LETTERb.  77 

that  it  is  possible  that  any  thing  could  remove  a  desire  to 
exist  in  the  future,  except  a  very  strong"  fear  that  that  state 
would  be  awfully  miserable.  To  be  thankful  to  God,  and  to 
rejoice  in  his  goodness,  and  at  the  same  time  feel  no  desire 
to  continue  in  the  enjoyment  of  such  favour  is  to  me  a  com- 
plete solescism,  which  sufficiently  refutes  itself. 

8th.  Your  assertion,  that  if  a  revelation  was  ever  neces- 
sary, it  was  necessary  only  to  reconcile  man  to  his  present 
state  of  existence,  is  thought  to  be  an  error  of  no  small  mag- 
nitude. If  you  had  said  that  revelation  was  necessary  only 
for  the  improvement  of  man  in  his  present  state  it  would 
have  been  more  correct. 

As  for  man's  present  existence,  it  seems  he  has  love 
enough ;  people  wish  to  live  here,  and  no  doubt  they  would 
wish  to  stay  forever  if  they  had  no  hope  in  the  future.  By 
improving  our  present  state  by  a  divine  revelation,  I  wish 
to  be  understood  to  comprehend  all  that  is  meant  by  the  min- 
istry of  reconciliation.  This  has  for  its  object  the  reconcil- 
iation of  man  to  God.  But  it  is  a  soul  rejoicing  fact,  that  of  the 
precious  things  brought  forth  by  the  sun  of  righteousness, 
the  hope  of  immortality  is  its  most  precious  jewel.  This 
makes  every  thing  valuable.  Hence  we  may  lay  up  our 
tr^ptires  where  neither  moth  nor  rust  can  corrupt,  nor 
thieves  break  through  and  steal.  Here  God's  bright  favour 
will  never  grow  dim,  nor  will  our  love  and  gratitude  ever 
decay.  Do  you  see  this  celestial  form  leaning  on  her  an- 
chored while  the  raging  waves  of  a  restless  sea  dash  against 
her,  feel  unmoved  ?  Do  you  observe  her  aspect  firm,  and 
her  eyes  turned  towards  Heaven  ?  And  woulost  you  wish  to 
cast  her  down  and  wreck  her  on  the  quick  sands  of  dismal 
doubt?  Go,  brother,  to  the  chamber  of  sickness,  where  life's 
waning  embers  can  no  longer  warm  the  dying  heart,  there 
hear  from  cold  and  quivering  lips  this  hope  exprest,  1  long 
to  be  with  Christ,  I  long  to  be  at  rest.  Would  you  blast  this 
amaranthine  flower  ?  Would  you  plant  in  its  stead  the 
nightshade  of  dispair? 

Do  not,  dear  sir,  listen  too  long  to  the  wild  suggestions  of 
vain  fancy  and  wandering  imagination,  under  the  specious 
pretence  of  searching  after  truth.  1  am  apprehensive  that 
she  who  persuades  you  that  she  is  truth,  really  deserves 
another  name.  Jesus  is  the  way,  the  truth  and  the  life,  he 
also  is  made  unto  us  wisdom. 

Give  me  the  light  of  this  bright  sun  to  see, 
All  other  lights  like  met'ors  are  to  me  ; 
7* 


78  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

Give  me  that  way,  that  pleasant  path  to  know, 
I'll  walk  no  other  path  while  here  below. 
Wouldst  thou  be  wise  ?     This  wisdom  learn  to  scan, 
Which  brings  to  God,  the  wandering  heart  of  man. 

9th  and  last.  You  misunderstand  me  in  supposing-  that  I 
meant  to  insinuate,  that  by  what  you  wrote  respecting  the 
apostles'  stating  nothing  more  than  what  was  substantially 
true,  you  must  mean  that  they  siated  falsehood.  I  meant,  if 
you  do  not  believe  that  they  stated  the  truth  you  must  be- 
lieve that  they  stated  falsehood,  in  which  case  I  called  on  you 
to  make  a  short  work  of  our  argument  by  proving  that  what 
they  stated  was  not  true.  I  wonder  you  should  not  have 
thought  of  this  way  to  understand  me,  because  there  is  no 
way  to  explain  your  words  into  the  meaning  which  you  sup- 
posed I  had  attached  to  them,  while  what  I  now  suggest  is 
fairly  the  necessary  result  of  what  you  stated. 

On  this  subject  I  am  disposed  to  say  a  little  more.  If  we 
find  ourselves  in  serious  doubts  respecting  any  important 
particular  of  our  religion,  and  we  wish  to  have  the  matter 
cleared  up  to  our  satisfaction,  why  should  wespend  much 
time  and  write  many  sheets,  with  no  other  apparent  objejk 
than  to  keep  away  from  the  subject  which  labours  in^K 
minds  ?  If  you  were  under  the  necessity  of  bringing  aSe 
to  the  ground,  and  of  removing  it  from  the  forest,woul(P^>u 
ascend  the  tree  and  begin  your  work  on  the  extreme  twigs, 
or  would  you  cut  the  trunk  off  near  the  roots,  when  the 
whole  mass  would  come  down  together  ? 

You  will  apprehend  my  meaning.  The  fact  is,  if  the 
christian  religion  is  ever  overthown,  it  must  be  done,  not  by 
proving  that  professors  of  it  have  held  errors  and  have  been 
superstitious,  and  have  ever  practised  wickedness,  us- 
ing the  name  of  Christ  for  a  cloak,  &c.  but  by  proving  the 
testimony  of  the  new  testament  false.  Cut  the  trunk  of  the 
tree  off  at  this  place  and  the  work  is  done. 

But  if  it  were  possible,  in  the  nature  of  things  for  the  tes- 
timony borne  in  the  ne  w  testament  to  be  proved  false,can  you 
persuade  yourself  to  believe  that  it  would  not  have  been 
done  ?  lfa  book  containing  the  grossest  falshood,  the  most 
palpable  frauds,  pretensions  the  very  easiest  to  be  detected 
of  any  that  can  be  imagined,  could  be  got  up  and  published, 
and  be  copied  by  many  hands,  and  be  translated  into  differ- 
ent languages  on  purpose  to  overthrow  the  popular  religion 
of  all  countries  where  the  book  is  sent  or  carried,  and  if  in 
spite  of  truth,  and  all  the  learning  of  a  learned  age,  ;f  in 


SERIES   OF    LETTERS.  7S 

spite  of  all  sorts  of  superstition  combined  with  civil  gov- 
ernment, if  in  spite  of  reason,  argument,  persuasion,  the  ten- 
der love  and  compassion  of  parents,  interest,  honour,  ease, 
peace  and  quiet;  if  in  the  face  of  the  most  cruel  sufferings  and 
most  awful  deaths,  this  book,  with  all  its  abominable  lies,  and 
most  palpable  frauds  could  succeed,  its  doctrines  run  and  be 
glorified  ;  if  ancient  superstitions,  than  which  nothing  can 
have  a  more  despotic  sway  over  the  human  heart,if  the  priests 
of  long  venerated  idols  with  thousands  of  their  votaries  were 
humbled  before  this  testimony,  what  is  there  now  on  which 
we  can  rely  for  success  against  it  ? 

How  beautiful  are  reason  and  candor.  Dr.  Gamaliel  gives 
us  a  handsome  specimen.  "  Ye  men  of  Israel,  take  heed  to 
yourselves,  what  ye  intend  to  do  as  touching  these  men. — 
For  before  these  days  rose  up  Theudas,  boasting  himself  to 
be  somebody  :  to  whom  a  number  of  men,  about  four  hun- 
dred, joined  themselves:  who  was  slain;  and  all,  as  many 
as  obeyed  him,  were  scattered  and  brought  to  naught.  After 
this  man  roso  up  Judas  of  Galiiee  in  the  clays  of  the  taxing.and 
drew  awa}'  much  people  after  him  :  he  also  perished  ;  and 
aiL  even  as  many  as  obeyed  him,  were  dispersed.  And  now, 
ffciv  unto  you,  refrain  from  these  men,  and  let  them  alone  : 
fa^if  this  counsel  or  this  work  be  of  men,  it  will  come  to 
nar^ht  ;  but  if  it  be  of  God,  ye  cannot  overthrow  it  ;  lest 
haply  ye  be  found  even  to  fight  against  God."* 

Let  us  remark,  1st.  You  will  notice  that  this  passage 
ranks  with  hundreds  of  others  which  to  the  understanding  of 
sound  judgment  wears  every  feature  of  an  honest  and  true 
statement  of  facts.  I  will  take  it  on  myself  to  say  that  it 
does  not  appear  reasonable  that  men  who  were  fabricating  a 
la  lsehood, would  ever  have  thought  of  such  a  method  as  this- 
to  give  it  currency.  2d.  You  will  naturally  observe  that 
this  learned  doctor  of  the  law,  was  himself  persuaded  of  the 
truth  of  the  apostles'  testimony,  and  though  he  was  not  wil- 
ling to  make  so  great  a  sacrifice  as  he  must  if  he  professed 
Jesus  openly,  he  was  willing  to  espouse  the  cause  so  far  as 
his  learning  and  influence  would  go,  without  rendering  him- 
self odious  to  his  friends. 

3d.  It  is  pretty  e\ident,  that  whatever  Theudas  made 
a  handle  of  in  order  to  obtain  disciples,  Judas  of  Galilee  had 
that  very  unpopular  tax  (I  do  not  consult  any  authority  as  it 
is  immaterial,  but  only  follow  a  probable  suggestion)  which 
was  collected  about  the  time  of  the  birth  of  Jesus,  or  some 
other,  by  which  he  no  doubt,  strove   to  disaffect   the  Jews 


80  SERIES   OF   LETTERS. 

against  the  Roman  government,  which  they  very  naturally 
were  opposed  to.     But  Judas  did  not  succeed. 

4th.  Jesus  never  tried  to  persuade  the  people  against 
the  civil  authorities,  nor  did  he  ever  promise  his  disciples 
any  worldly  benefits,  nor  try  to  allure  the  people  after  him 
by  holding  out,  as  inducements,  any  thing  that  the  carnal 
passions  of  men  are  in  love  with  ;  and  yet  he  succeeded 
though  he  lost  his  life.  5th.  Dr.  Gamaliel  was  of  opinion 
that  if  the  gospel  were  not  of  God,  it  would  come  to  naught, 
but  it  did  not,  nor  is  there  the  least  probability  it  ever 
will. 

Yours,  &c.  H.  BALLOU. 


EXTRACTS  No.  VII. 

[In  this  number  the  objector  gives  the  whole  ground  of  his  objec- 
tions, and  the  reasons  for  his  doubts  :  which  he  states  as  follows,  viz. 

41  1.  Mankind,  in  all  ages  of  the  world,  have  been,  and  still  are 
prone  to  superstition. 

"  2.  It  cannot  be  denied,  but  that  a  part  of  mankind  at  least,  have 
believed,  and  still  are  believing  in  miracles  and  revelation,  which  are 
spurious. 

li  3.  The  facts  on  which  religion  is  predicated  are  unlike  every 
thing  of  which  we  have  any  positive  knowledge." 

Under  the  first  article,  the  objector  appealed  to  the  known  super- 
stitions of  the  world  :  not  only  of  the  Pagan  ;  but  of  the  Jewish,  Ma- 
hometan, and  Christian  world.  He  took  a  view  of  the  present  state 
of  Asia,  spake  of  the  u  voluntary  sacrifices  of  human  life  to  the  great 
image  at  Hugernaught !"  and  of  women  M  voluntarily  clirohing  the 
funeral  pile  to  be  burned  with  their  deceased  husbands  !"  He  took  a 
view  of  the  Inquisition  in  Old  Spain  ;  and  fiually  of  the  various  su- 
perstitious notions  and  practices  among  the  different  sects  of  chris- 
tians in  our  own  country. 

Under  the  second  article,  he  discanted  largely  on  the  pretensions 
of  Mahomet,  and  of  their  great  influence  and  extent;  and  also  of  the 
particular  tone  given  to  the  christian  religion  by  Constantine,  who, 
holding  the  reigns  of  government,  had  superior  means  in  extending 
his  influence  over  the  christian  world.  Having  made  these  remarks, 
the  objector  proceeds  :] 

u  If  therefore,  he  had  happened  only  to  have  favoured  the 
opinions  of  the  Gnostics,  we  might  have  expected,  and  pro- 
bably it  would  have  been  the  fact,  that  the  learned  clergy  of 
the  present  day  would  have  held  that  Jesus  was  not  a  man 
in  reality,  but  only  a  man  in  appearance  ;  that  he  assumed  a 
body  that  he  could  put  on  or  throw  off  at  pleasure ;  and 
that  he  died  and  was  raised  again  in  appearance  only.     Or 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  81 

otherwise,  if  he  had  been  disposed  to  come  down  to  the 
simplicity  and  understanding  of  the  common  people,  then 
indeed  Christ  might  still  have  been  considered  as  the  Jews' 
expected  Messiah;  yet  we  should  have  considered  him  a 
man,  and  nothing  more  than  a  man  ;  though  '  a  man  ap- 
proved of  God  ;' — '  a  man  who  hath  told  us  the  truth  ;" — even 
1  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  the  son  of  Joseph  ;  as  it  seems  was  the 
opinion  of  Peter,  John  and  Philip.  Rut  the  former  opinion 
had  been  too  long  treated  as  heresy  by  ali  the  bishops  to  be 
imbibed  by  Constantine,  while  the  bishops  themselves,  on 
the  other  hand,  had  been  too  long  contaminated  with  the 
Platonic  philosophy  to  descend  to  the  simplicity  of  the  lat- 
ter; therefore  we  have  a  religion,  compounded,  partly  cf 
the  simplicity  of  the  truth,  and  partly  of  Platonism.  Con- 
stantine, however,  being  supported  by  a  great  majority  of 
all  the  bishops,  in  a  great  measure  faceted  his  purpose; 
though  not  fully  to  his  expectation  :  for  it  seems  he  did  not 
expect  that  any  one  would  presume  to  oppose  the  deci-ions 
of  this  grand  council,  which  he  had  summoned  and  convened 
at  his  own  expense,  or  at  the  expense  of  the  empire,  but  in 
this  he  was  mistaken  ;  for  many,  even  after  this,  would  take 
the  liberty  not  only  to  think  for  themselves,  but  also  to 
speak  their  own  thoughts. 

u  One  circumstance  more  I  cannot  avi  id  mentioning  in  this 
place,  viz.  The  conversion  of  Constantine  from  heathenism 
to  the  christian  faith.  Great  men,  if  turned  about  at  all, 
must  be  turned  about  by  great  means  !  But  whatever  might 
have  been  thought  of  Constantine's  conversion,  by  the  peo- 
ple of  that  day,  the  account  given  of  it  does  not  argue  any 
thing  very  forcibly  in  my  mind,  in  favour  of  the  truth  of  di- 
vine revelation.  Great  men,  however,  are  not  always  free 
from  superstition  ;  and  they  are  just  as  likely  to  be  deceived 
respecting  things  which  are  above  their  comprehension  as 
others.  This  is  the  most  charitable  way  in  which  I  can  re- 
concile the  following  account  which,  as  Eusebius,  the  con- 
temporary and  historian  of  Constantine,  says,  was  stated  on- 
der  the  solemnity  of  an  oath.  For  a  full  account  of  this  ex- 
traordinary story.  See  the  2d  vol.  of  Dr.  Priestley's  Church 
History,  per.  7,  sec.  9.  I  shall  not  attempt  to  quote  it  in 
full,  nor  is  it  necessary,  and  what  I  do  quote  is  from  memory 
only,  as  I  write  abroad,  my  books  not  being  with  me. 

"Reflecting  on  the  ill  success  of  his  predecessors  in  the 
numerous  wars  in  which  they  had  been  engaged,  when  their 
priests  and  oracles  had  ever  promised  them  success,  and  also 
considering  the  better  success  of  his  father,  Constantine  coa- 


82  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

eluded  from  these  circumstances  that  his  father  prayed  to, 
and  whs  assisted  by  a  different  god  !  When  he  prayed,  there- 
fore, he  always  prayed  to  the  God  of  his  father.  And  being 
thus  praying  one  evening,  towards  the  going  down  of  the 
sun,  with  his  face  toward  the  same,  he  saw  the  appearance 
of  a  cross  in  the  sun,  with  these  words  over  it  in  Greek, 
txt*  ukcc  by  this  conquer.  Not  knowing,  (or  else  pretend- 
ing not  to  knot?)  what  this  sign  should  mean,  he  called  to- 
gether some  of  the  christian  priests  for  an  explanation  ;  who 
explained  it  as  might  naturally  have  been  supposed  they 
would,  that  it  was  a  representation  of  the  cross,  on  which 
Christ  was  crucified,  and  that  there  could  be  no  doubt  but 
that  he  had  now  interposed  as  God,  in  behalf  of  the  chris- 
tians, to  deliver  them  from  their  enemies,  and  of  course 
from  further  persecution  !  I  do  not  pretend  to  be  any  thing 
more  than  substantially  correct  in  the  above  account  (by  which 
you  will  further  see  how  I  use  the  word  substantially,  about 
which  we  have  had  some  dispute)  i.  e.  I  may.  yea  undoubt- 
edly, have  differed,  as  to  words,  yet  I  know  I  am  correct  in 
the  most  material  part,  and  of  the  use  which  Constantine 
made  of  this  supposed  miraculous,  or  supernatural  appear- 
ance. He  said  also,  the  soldiers  saw  it  as  well  as  himself! 
Now,  if  we  give  full  credit  to  this  account,  what  must  we 
think  of  Christianity  ?  The  meek  and  lowly  Jesus,  who  was 
led  l  like  a  lamb  to  the  slaughter,'  without  the  least  resist- 
ance, and  who  had  suffered  thousands  to  follow  him  in  the 
same  way,  now,  by  a  miraculous  interposition,  arms  a  man 
with  carnal  weapons,  and,  Mahometan  like,  authorizes  him 
to  vindicate  his  cause,  and  avenge  his  wrongs,  by  shedding 
the  blood  of  his  enemies  !  Or,  if  we  do  not  credit  this  ac- 
count, what  must  we  think  of  Constantine  ?  and  also  of 
Christianity  so  far  as  it  can  be  traced  to,  and  made  to  depend 
on  his  influence  ?  That  candor  and  charit}',  however, 
which  I  ever  wish  to  maintain,  will  oblige  me  in  this,  as  in 
all  other  cases  of  a  similar  nature,  to  take  the  middle  course. 
I  shall  therefore  suppose  that  there  was  some  natural  ap- 
pearance, perhaps  a  parhelion,  the  cause  of  which  Constan- 
tine did  not  fully  understand,  and,  from  the  appearance  in 
the  sky  around  it,  his  fancy,  aided  by  superstition,  painted  to 
his  imagination  the  supposed  cross,  as  also  the  Greek  words, 
which  being  pointed  out  to  the  soldiers  they  might  easily 
imagine  the  same,  or,  if  they  did  not,  would  not  like  to  op- 
pose the  opinion  of  their  general.  Thus  circumstanced, 
whether  he  really  believed  it  to  be  any  thing  supernatural 


■. 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  83 

or  not,  Constantine  was  disposed  to  make  the  most  of  it  he 
could,  by  turning  it  to  the  best  possible  account.* 

u  It  appears,  however,  after  all,  that  Constantine  was  a 
man  of  great  moderation,  and  on  the  whole,  a  very  good 
man :  yet,  that  he  was  not  wholly  clear  from  superstition  is 
very  evident  from  the  following  circumstance.  Notwith- 
standing his  extraordinary,  and  what  was  supposed  by  all, 
miraculous  conversion,  together  with  his  great  pretensions  ; 
and  all  that  he  had  done  for  Christianity,  yet  he  neglected 
his  own  baptism  till  he  found  he  was  very  nigh  his  end  ;  when 
he  dressed  himself  in  white,  and  the  bed  on  which  he  lay, 
also  all  in  white,  in  which  dress  he  was  baptised  and  partook 
of  the  sacrament !  and  thus  he  continued  in  white  till  he  died. 
This  was  undoubtedly  from  a  mistaken  notion,  that  there 
was  something  really  purifying  in  those  outward  ceremonies, 
and  also  from  the  doctrine  of  the  Navatians,  a  certain  sect, 
whose  opinions  it  was  supposed  he  favoured,  though  not 
very  openly,  i.  e.  if  a  person  committed  sin  after  having 
been  thus  purified  he  could  not  die  in  union  with  the 
church. 

u  You  may  perhaps  object  here  and  say,  all  this  is  to  no 
purpose,  as  Christianity  was  well  established  before  ;  and 
had  existed  for  nearly  three  centuries,  and  increased  too, 
notwithstanding  the  many  most  bitter  and  cruel  persecutions. 
Therefore  what  you  say  respecting  Constantine  only  proves 
that  Christianity  has  been  con-upted,  but  it  is  no  objection 
against  its  truth.  Very  good.  If  the  facts  above  stated  are 
admitted,  let  them  prove  what  they  will,  1  am  not  the  au- 
ihor  of  those  facts,  nor  accountable  for  what  is  proved  by 
them.  The  conversion  of  Constantine,  however,  if  correct, 
bears  some  analogy  to  the  conversion  of  St.  Paul  :  hence, 
the  supposition  that  one  is  not  correct,  brings  a  little  doubt 
over  the  mind  respecting  the  truth  of  the  other :  for  both 

•  "  Upon  the  whole,"  says  Dr.  Priestly,  (vol.  2,  p.  96)  "  it  ap- 
pears to  me  most  probable,  that  Constantine  and  his  friends  saw  a 
natural  parhelion,  and  that  all  the  other  circumstances  were  either 
imagined,  or  invented  ;  and  that  the  story  has  lost  nothing  in  passing 
through  the  hands  of  Eu=ebius."  Constantine  also  states  (which  I 
forgot  to  mention  above)  that  u  Christ  appeared  to  him  in  a  dream, 
the  night  following,  with  the  very  same  sign  which  he  had  seen  in  the 
heavens,  ordering  him  to  make  a  military  standard  like  it,  and  assur- 
ing him  that  it  would  be  his  security  in  battles."  "  By  this  note  it 
will  be  perceived  that  I  have  compared  what  I  have  written  with  the 
part  of  the  history  from  whence  it  was  taken,  and  that  I  find  nothing 
in  it  materially  erroneous." 


84  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

being  by  means  which  weje  supernatural  ;  if  both  are  gup- 
ported  on  equal  testimony,  why  should  they  not  both  share 
the  same  fate  in  our  minds  ?  Both  were  equally  possible  ; 
it  is  the  want  of  probability,  therefore,  arising  from  the 
want  of  equal  evidence  in  its  favour,  which  leads  us  to  re- 
ject the  truth  of  the  circumstances'  attending  the  conversion 
of  Constantino,  rather  than  those  attending-  the  conversion 
of  St.  Paul.  The  conversion  of  Constantino  also,  if  gen- 
uine, seems  to  have  been  designed  for  a  very  different  ob- 
ject, and  was  attended  with  a  very  different  effect.  This 
would  incline  mo  to  believe  in  the  validity  of  fhr.t  of  the 
apostle's,  rather  than  that  of  the  emperor.  Nevertheless, 
as  it  respects  the  facts  ;  he  who  caused  a  light  at  mid-  lay,  a- 
bov=»  the  brightness  of  the  sun,  might  as  easily  have  painted 
the  sign  of  the  cross  on  'tis  disk  ;  and  he  who  spake  to  Saul 
from  Heaven  with  an  audible  voice,  in  the  Hebrew  tongue, 
might  as  easily  have  painted  letters  and  words  in  Greek,  so 
that  they  might  be  distinctly  read  in  the  firmament  ! 

"  Leaving  all  ancient  miracles  and  revelation,  I  will  come 
down  to  those  of  our  own  times,  and  in  our  own  country. — 
Strands  to  tell,  there  is  a  sect  of  people  now  among  us,  who 
sprang  up  less  than  half  a  century  ago,  whose  religion  is  pro- 
fessedly founded  on  miracles  and  revelation.  On  miracles 
wrought  by  the  first  founders  of  the  sect,  as  by  Christ  and  his 
apostles,  and  on  a  revelation  also  made  directly  to  them,  and 
through  them  to  the  believers,  as  by  the  inspired  writers  of 
the  new  testament.  They  appear  to  be  something  similar  in 
sentiment,  as  it  respects  the  person  of  Christ,  to  the 
ancient  Ariens;  with  this  difference  only,  they  conceived  that 
as  Christ  made  his  first  appearance  in  Jesus,the  son  of  a  car- 
penter, so  he  has  made  his  second  appearance  in  Ann,  the 
daughter  of  a  blacksmith,  whom  they  call  mother;  and  they 
consider  their  church  the  A'ew  Jerusalem,  that  holy  city 
which  was  to  come  down  from  God  out  of  Heaven. 

In  the  year  1808,  about  the  sam^  time  after  their  first  rise 
as  it  was  after  the  days  of  Jesus  to  the  writing  of  the  new 
testament,  they  published  a  history  of  their  sect,  in  a  work 
entitled  '  Chrises  second  appearance,'1  or  the  New  Jerusalem 
Chvrch,  setting  forth  their  rise,  progress  and  present  state  ; 
together  with  their  principles,  customs  and  mode  of  worship. 
This  work  contains  an  account  of  their  mother  Jinn,  and 
the  first  elders;  and  particularly  an  account  of  the  miracies 
said  to  have  been  wrought  by  them.  If  my  memory  serves 
me,  (as  the  book  is  not  by  me)  there  is   an  account  of  about 


SERIES   OF    LETTERS.  8L 

./brfy  miracles,  all  of  which  are  well  attested,  and  though 
they  acknowledge  that  most  of  them  are  inferior  to  those 
wrought  by  Jesus  and  his  apostles,  yet  they  contend  that 
they  are  no  more  inferior  to  those  than  those  are  to  the  mira- 
cles wrought  by  Moses.  They  contend  that  for  the  plagues 
in  Egypt,  the  dividing  the  red  sea,  bringing  water  out  of  the 
rock,  feeding  Israel  forty  years  in  the  wilderness  with  bread 
from  heaven,  and  that  there  should  always  fall  a  double 
portion  on  the  sixth  Any,  but  none  on  the  seventh,  that  that 
which  fell  «'»n  the  sixth  day,  should  keep  two  days,  but  on 
ail  other  days  it  would  keep  but  one,  and  that  afterward, 
some  of  the  same  bread  or  manna  was  laid  up  in  the  ark  of 
the  covenant  which  kept  for  ages,  as  a  memorial  ;  also  the 
dividing  the  waters  of  the  river  Jordan,  and  the  fall  of  the 
walls  of  Jericho  ;  yea  most  or  all  of  these,  according  to 
reason  or  human  appearance,  are  as  much  greater  than  the 
miracles  wrought  by  Jesus  and  his  apostles,  as  those  are 
greater  than  those  wrought  by  Ann  and  her  elders !  It  is  true, 
they  did  not  pretend  to  raise  the  dead,  but  either  these  ac- 
counts are  all  fabrications  and  lies,  or  else  they  had  among 
them  the  gift  of  healing,  and  that  too  miraculously.  A  wo- 
man who  had  fell  with  her  horse,  by  the  falling  of  a  bridge, 
and  had  broken  several  of  her  ribs,  besides  being  otherwise 
very  much  bruised,  was  cured  in  one  evening,  so  that  she 
joined  in  the  dance  !  A  boy  who  had  cut  his  foot  so  that  a 
person  might  have  laid  his  finger  into  the  wound,  which  bled 
very  profusely,  was  cured  in  a  few  hours  so  that  nothing 
was  to  be  seen  of  the  wound  excepting  a  white  streak, 
about  the  bigness  of  a  common  thread !  and  many  others  of 
a  like  kind,  too  numerous  to  be  mentioned  in  this  place. 

M  You  will  readily  perceive  that  I  allude  to  the  Shakers  ; 
a  people  who  are  enjoying  privileges  among  us  which  no 
other  people  enjoy,  except  the  Friends,  called  also  Quakers : 
and  who  are  debarred  from  no  privileges  excepting  those 
from  which  they  either  religiously  or  super stitiously  debar 
themselves.  Thus  people,  in  consequence  of  their  religion, 
have  entirely  changed  their  manners,  customs,  and  modes  of 
worship.  They  have  also  endured  considerable  persecu- 
tion ;  and  that  they  have  not  suffered  martyrdom  in  defence 
of  their  religion,  is  no  fault  of  theirs.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  but  that  there  has  been  fanaticism  enough  on  their 
part  to  have  done  it,  if  there  had  been  only  bigotry  and  cru- 
elty enough  in  the  people,  at  that  time,  to  have  put  it  in  exe- 
cution.    Let  the  same  spirit  reign  among  the  people  for  a 


86  SERIES    OF   LETTERS. 

short  time,  which  reigned  in  Boston  when  the  Quakers  were 
put  to  death  for  their  religion,  and  the  Shakers  also  would  be 
able  to  boast  of  their  martyrs  in  defence  of  the  truth  of  their 
particular  sect,  and  of  course  of  the  miracles  and  revelation 
on  which  it  is  said  to  have  been  founded 

a  And  here  I  wish  to  remark  a  little  on  martyrdom,  seeing 
it  is  often  brought  in  defence  of  the  truth  of  divine  revela- 
tion. I  am  aware  that  great  stress  has  been  laid  upon  this, 
and  it  will  still  be  considered  as  one  of  its  main  pillars.  I 
apprehend,  however,  that  more  stress  has  been  laid  upon 
martyrdom  than  what  it  will  justly  bear.  If  this  is  a  test  of 
the  truth  of  religion,  there  is  scarcely  any  religion  but  what 
may  be  proved  true.  Only  make  death  honourable,  of  any 
kind  whatever,  in  the  eyes  of  the  people,  and  there  are 
always  enough  who  are  ready  and  willing  to  die  for  the  sake 
of  the  honour  which  will  be  in  consequence  attached  to 
their  names.  But  only  let  any  particular  kind  of  death  be 
considered,  in  the  eyes  of  the  people,  meritorious,  and  the 
sure  and  certain  road  to  endless  bliss,  and  there  will  not  only 
be  enough  found  willing  to  undergo  this  death,  if  they  can 
find  any  to  inflict  it  upon  them,  but  they  will  absolutely  court 
it  !  Instead  therefore  of  having  my  faith  strengthened  by 
reading  the  book  of  martyrs,  as  I  thought  I  had  some  reason 
to  expect,  it  has  produced  a  quite  contrary  effect.  Notwith- 
standing these  accounts  were  taken  down  by  the  friends  of 
the  martyrs,  and  by  them  have  been  handed  down  to  us,  who, 
as  we  may  well  suppose,  were  rather  prejudiced  in  their 
favour,  yet  nevertheless,  it  is  impossible  to  disguise  the  spir- 
it and  motives  with  which  many  of  those  infatuated  people 
eagerly  sought  and  met  death. 

"  In  all  those  accounts  it  is  but  too  clearly  discovered, 
what  has  been  too  often  the  fact,  that  the  most  bitterly  per- 
secuted would  have  become  the  most  violent  persecutors,  if 
there  had  been  only  a  chance  for  them  so  to  have  done,  and 
if  there  had  been,  in  their  view,  an  equal  occasion.  The 
persecutors  of  people  for  their  religion  have  always  consid- 
ered the  persecuted,  either  heretics  or  infidels;  who  if  per- 
secuted by  heathens,  unless  they  could  be  brought  t©  sacri- 
fice to  their  heathen  gods,  or  if  by  christians,  unless  they 
could  be  brought  to  acknowledge  the  particular  faith  em- 
braced by  the  orthodoxy  of  the  day,  were  considered  as  mere 
nuisances  or  pests  to  society ;  and  therefore  for  the  public 
good,  it  was  thought  necessary  to  take  them  out  of  the 
world  !     While  on  the  other  hand,  the  persecuted  have  a!- 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  8? 

ways  considered  that,  if  they  suffered  death  in  defence  of 
their  religion,  they  were  certain  of  being  raised  to  great 
honour  and  dignity  in  another  world  ;  a  privilege  which 
they  undoubtedly  belipved  their  persecutors  would  never 
enjoy  !  And,  whatever  was  the  opinion  of  Christ  and  his 
apostles  on  this  subject,  it  cannot  be  denied  but  that  the  idea 
very  soon  become  prevalent  among  their  followers  that  the 
distinction  between  them  and  a  wicked  world,  particularly 
their  persecutor*,  would  be  eternal !  Under  these  circum- 
stances, I  do  not  wonder  at  all  that  men  have  been  found 
willing  to  die  for  their  religion;  yea,  and  even  to  court 
death  by  ail  the  means  of  which  their  own  consciences  would 
approve  2 

14  But,  you  may  sa}',  all  this  does  not  account  for  the  death 
of  the  first  martyrs.  Very  true.  I  admit  that  it  does  not. 
But  it  shews  that,  onlv  let  the  work  be  begun,  from  any  cause 
whatever,  there  is  no  difficulty  in  its  being  continued. 

M  Suppose  then,  if  you  please,  that  the  first  martyrs  were 
killed  by  a  mob,  a  mere  rabble,  without  any  legal  process,  or 
even  form  of  trial ;  as,  from  which  appears  by  the  account, 
was  the  case  with  the  death  of  Stephen,  the  first  christian 
martyr;  and,  according  to  tradition,  most  of  the  other  apos- 
tles: (and  it  may  be  remarked  here,  it  is  only  by  tradition 
that  we  have  any  account  of  the  death  of  the  apostles  ;  as 
all  authentic  documents  on  the  subject,  if  there  ever  were 
any,  are  lost :)  I  say,  let  such  a  circumstance  as  the  death 
of  Stephen  take  place  in  any  country,  and  in  any  age  of  the 
world  ;  but  more  especially  in  that  age  and  country  in  which 
he  lived  ;  and  then  let  the  same  honour,  and  the  same  sup- 
posed consequences  be  attached  to  such  a  death,  as  undoubt- 
edly were  attached  to  the  death  of  Stephen  ;  and  there  can 
be  no  doubt  but  that  others  would  be  willing  to  follow  the 
example. 

fci  Only  let  the  blood  once  begin  to  flow,  no  matter  how, 
and  then  only  attach  eternal  consequences  to  it,  and  hold 
out  inducements  of  an  eternal  nature,  and  persuade  men  to 
believe  thern  (which  is  not  so  difficult  a  thing  as  some  may 
imagine)  and  you  will  never  want  for  victims,  so  long  as  you 
can  find  a  zeal  sufficiently  blind  and  mad  ;  as  to  continue 
the  slaughter.  In  this  way,  I  conceive,  martyrdom,  of  every 
species  and  kind,  may  be  rationally  accounted  for.     But, 

"  It  may  be  said  all  this  does  not  disprove  the  miracles 
and  revelation  on  which  the  christian  religion  is  founded. 

<l  i  acknowledge  it  does  not  j  neither  do  I  expect  to  dis- 


86  SKKIES    OF    LETTERS. 

prove  them.  I  admit  that  revelation,  and  of  course  the 
christian  religion  may  possibly  be  founded  in  truth,  notwith- 
standing- the  truth  of  all  that  I  have  as  yet  urged,  or  shall 
urge  against  it.  But  I  call  on  you,  sir,  to  disprove  the  mira- 
cles and  revelation  which  1  have  mentioned;  of  a  more  mod- 
ern date,  or  else  acknowledge  their  truth.  If  you  acknowl- 
edge the  truth  of  those  miracles,  I  shall  expect  you  will  con- 
form to  the  religion  predicated  upon  them;  and  of  course 
forsake  your  bosom  companion  (which  1  ppesume  would  be 
a  much  greater  cross  than  ever  you  have  yet  taken  up,)  and 
also  your  darling  offspring  (or  else  take  them  with  you)  and 
go  and  live  with  the  Shakers!!!  But  if  you  prove  them 
false,  it  will  only  be  that  people  may  become  so  infatuated 
us  to  believe  in  miracles  which  are  spurious. 

u  For  notwithstanding  the  smallness  of  the  numbers  of 
this  people,  which  by  the  way,  are  considerable  ;  and  not- 
withstanding the  contemptible  view  in  which  they  have  been, 
and  still  are  held  by  the  world  ;  yet,  you  may  find  it  more 
difficult  to  prove  the  falsity  of  their  pretended  miracles  thau 
.a  present  you  are  aware  ;  for  they  are  very  well  attested  ; 
and  some  of  *the  witnesses  are  still  living,  or  were  so  when 
their  testimonj'  was  first  published ;  as  also,  if  I  recollect 
right,  some  of  the  persons  on  whom  the  miracles  were  said 
to  have  been  wrought;  who,  no  doubt,  would  still  testify  to 
the  same  things.  If  they  testify  falsely,  who  can  help  it? — 
Although  thousands  may  believe  to  the  contrary  ;  many  of 
whom  being  too  in  situations,  probably  to  have  known  these 
things,  if  true  ;  yet  I  believe  it  would  be  difficult,  and  very 
difficult  indeed,  to  rind  any  who  could  absolutely  say  that 
those  things  did  not  take  place. 

14  And  if  there  is  a  people  now  existing  among  us,  in  dif- 
ferent parts  of  the  country,  and  in  different,  but  large  exten- 
sive families,  whose  manners,  customs,  and  worship  are  all 
very  different  from  ours,  and  who  believe  in  miracles  oh 
which  their  religion  is  said  to  have  been  founded ;  and  if 
those  miracles,  although  not  founded  in  truth,  cannot  now 
be  proved  false,  notwithstanding  they  are  said  to  have  taken 
place  in  our  own  country,  and  ever  since  we  were  born,  I 
would  ask,  ought  any  one  to  be  censured  for  not  giving  full 
credit  to  miracles  said  to  have  been  wrought,  all  of  them 
nearly  two,  and  most  of  them  above  three  thousand  years 
affo  ;  and  among  a  people  too,  of  which  we  know  but  very 
Iktle  ?  1  say,  ought  any  one  to  be  censured  for  doing  this, 
although  he  should  not  be  able  to  prove  any  of  those  mira- 
cles false  ? 


JERIKS   OF    LETTERS.  8.9 

u  I  conclude  I  shall  not  be  censured  for  not  believing  in 
the  miracles  said  to  have  been  wrought  by  the  Shakers  ;  but 
let  the  government  undertake  to  annihilate  that  blind  and 
superstitious  class  of  people  :  let  them  increase  their  num- 
bers by  persecution,  which,  like  the  effects  of  all  other  per- 
secutions, undoubtedly  they  would;  let  them,  in  the  course 
of  two  or  three  centuries,  get  the  reins  of  government  into 
their  own  hands;*  let  them  then  follow  the  example  of 
Constantine  in  demolishing  the  temples  of  the  heathen  gods  ; 
let  them  demolish  every  steepled  meeting-house,  and  intro- 
duce an  entire  new  order  of  things;  let  them  al«o  new  mo- 
die  their  scriptures,  change  in  some  degree  their  mode  of 
worship  and  manner  of  living,  and  fix  every  thing  to  the 
policy  of  the  state  ;  let  the  old  opposition  be  entirely  extin- 
guished, and  new  sects  spring  up  among  themselves ; 
let  this  be  the  order  of  things  for  a  number  of  cen- 
turies, and  then  let  a  man  call  in  question  the  truth  of  Shaker 
miracles  or  Shaker  revelation,  and  he  must  do  it  as  his  peril ! 
It  would  undoubtedly  cost  him  his  life  ! 

u  I  might  also  mention  here  another  person  now  living  in 
the  western  part  of  the  state  of  New-York,  who  also  makes 
pretensions  to  be  Christ  in  his  second  coming,  and  in  imita- 
tion of  him  has  chosen  twelve  as  immediate  apostles,  and  who 
has  a  considerable  number  of  followers.  But  as  this  person 
is  still  living,  and  it  is  uncertain  whether  the  sect  will  take 
much  root,  I  choose  to  pass  it  over  in  silence. 

"  I  6hall  only  call  your  attention  to  one  circumstance 
more,  and  then  dismiss  my  second  proposition. 

*  You  very  well  recollect,  I  presume,  the  account  given 

by  Mrs.  A ,  of  W ,  N.  H.  in  which  she  affirms  that 

she  saw  and  conversed  with  her  husband,  Mr.  John  A , 

for  about  an  hour  and  a  half,  who  appeared  to  her  some  con- 
siderable time,  1  believe  about  three  months,  after  he  had 
been  dead  !     This  is  no  fiction.     Mrs.  A  is  still  living, 

and  still  affirms  to  the  truth  of  what  she  has  testified  ;  which 
account  you  know  was  published  by  two  respectable  witnes- 
ses who  took  it  down,  for  that  purpose,  from  her  lips. 

"  It  is  true,  there  has  been,  but  very  little  said  in  the 
world  respecting  this  matter,  and  I  presume,  for  this  plain 
and  obvious  reason  ;  the  account  did  not  correspond  with 

*  Were  it  not  for  other  causes  besides  that  of  Christianity,  I  should 
think  this  full  as  likely  as  it  was  that  Christianity  should  ever  get  the 
reins  of  government,  judging  from  what  Christianity  was  when  it  had 
existed  no  longer  than  the  Sfeakers. 

3* 


SO  SERIES   OF   LETTERS. 

the  views  of  what  is  termed  orthodoxy  in  Christianity.  If  it 
had,  i.  e.  if  he  had  brought  as  much  tidings  concerning  the 
supposed  hell  in  another  world,  as  he  did  respecting  the  sup- 
posed heaven,  the  account  would  have  been  published  in 
every  magazine,  in  every  religious  tract,  and  in  every  peri- 
odical work  throughout  the  globe  !  Why  not  so,  as  well  as 
many  accounts  which  were  similar  in  other  respects?  But 
as  this  account  did  not  favour  such  views,  it  is  left  to  die  in 
oblivion. 

"As  the  particulars  of  this  account,  however,  make  noth- 
ing either  in  favour  or  against  my  present  purpose,  I  shall 
not  occupy  time  and  room  to  relate  it.  Suffice  it  only  to 
say,  if  there  were  no  mistake  or  deception  in  the  matter, 
this  account  can  be  nothing  short  of  a  revelation  from  God; 
as  much  so  as  any  revelation  which  has  ever  been  made 
from  God  to  man. 

"  For  no  one  can  believe  that  Mr.  A.  could  appear  to  his 
wife,  after  he  was  dead,  unless  God  sent  him;  and  if  God 
sent  him,  no  one  can  doubt  the  truth  x>f  his  testimony.  No 
one  can  well  conceive  of  any  motive  Mrs.  A.  could  have  in 
giving  this  account,  unless  she  fully  believed  it.  Her  daugh- 
ter also  was  able  to  corroborate  the  account  in  some  de- 
gree, by  saying  that  she  heard  her  mother  conversing  in  the 
fiedroom,  but  heard  no  other  voice  ;  and  she  interrogated 
faer  on  the  subject  when  she  came  out,  by  asking  with  whom 
she  had  been  talking,  &c.  But  surprised  on  being  informed 
that  it  was  with  her  father,  and  supposing,  as  she  naturally 
would,that  her  mother  had  been  talking  in  her  sleep,  she  re- 
quested her  to  say  nothing  about  what  she  had  either  seen  or 
heard,  saying,  that  no  one  would  believe  her  if  she  did  But 
Mrs.  A.  was  able  to  convince  her  daughter  that  she  had  not 
been  asleep,  by  telling  her  of  persons  who  had  gone  by  her 
window  during  the  time;  one  man  in  a  soldier's  dress,  and 
another  driving  a  yoke  of  oxen.  I  state  these  things  from 
memory  only,  for  I  have  not  seen  the  account  since  soon  af- 
ter it  was  published,  or  at  least  within  three  or  four  years, 
that  I  now  recollect ;  yet  I  believe  I  could  state  the  whole 
of  it  nearly  verbatim  as  it  was  published.  Now  I  do  not  be- 
lieve that  Mrs.  A.  ever  designed  to  state,  or  that  she  now 
has  the  least  idea  that  she  has  stated  any  thing  incorrect  on 
this  subject.     And  yet  after  all,  I  doubt  of  its  reality  ! 

"  Such  is  my  incredulity  ;  and  I  see  no  way  to  avoid  it 
If  it  be  a  fault  in  me,  may  God  forgive  it;  though  I  am 
wholly  unconscious  of  its  being  one. 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  91 

"  When  one  of  two  things  presented  to  the  mind  must  be 
true,  and  the  truth  of  one  absolutely  excludes  the  truth  of 
the  other,  a  rational  man  will  always  believe  that  which  to 
his  own  understanding  is  the  most  probable.  Concerning 
therefore  the  account  given  by  Mrs.  A.  it  stands,  in  my  mind 
thus :  either  it  is  all  a  realilv,  i.  e.  that  her  husband  did  ab- 
solutely appear  to  her ;  that  he  did  give  her  the  account 
which  she  has  stated ;  and  that  that  account  is  in  fact  true  ; 
or  else,  it  was  nothing  more  than  the  power  of  imagination, 
which  a  certain  train  of  ideas  and  reflections  had  produced 
in  her  mind, which, like  a  kind  of  reverie,  seemed  to  her  like 
a  reality.  And  although  I  should  not  have  made  the  same 
conclusion  once,  yet  from  my  present  knowledge  of  human 
nature,  together  with  my  own  experience,  1  do  not  hesitate 
to  reject  the  former  idea,  and  believe  the  latter.  If  in 
judging  thus,  I  do  injustice  either  to  Mrs.  A.  or  to  the  truth 
of  God,  lean  only  ask  forgiveness  of  a  wrong,  which,  in 
truth,  is  by  no  means  intended.  But  in  justice  to  my  own 
understanding  I  could  not  state  differently,  if  I  knew  this 
would  be  the  last  sentence  I  should  ever  write. 

"  Hence  after  making  proper  deduction  for  all  that  can 
be  accounted  for  in  this  way,  laying  out  of  the  question  at 
the  same  time  all  that  we  may  justly  suppose  were  the 
mere  glosses  of  the  historian,  or  the  lubricous  figures  of  the 
poet,  which  are  verv  peculiar  to  the  ancient  style  of  writ- 
ing ;  after  making  due  allowances  also  for  interpolations, 
or  what  in  more  modern  times  have  been  considered  pious 
frauds!  and  after  rejecting  every  thing  (if  any  such  there 
be)  which  savors  of  gross  imposition  !  if  there  be  any  thing 
left  to  support  the  truth  of  divine  revelation,  then  it  may 
rationally  be  believed. 

lt  3.  The  facts  on  which  revelation  is  predicated  are  un- 
like every  thing  of  which  we  have  any  positive  knowledge. 

4*  Of  the  truth  of  this  proposition  you  must  be  sensible  ; 
yea,  unless  the  revelation  had  been  made  directly  to  our- 
selves, it  is  impossible  that  it  should  be  otherwise  than  true. 
Neither  of  us  have  ever  seen  any  thing  miraculous  !  The 
ancients,  he  vever,  were  carried  away  with  this  supposition  ; 
the  same  as  the  moderns  have  been  with  the  idea  of  witches, 
wizards,  ghosts,  apparitions,  &c.  and  many  things  which 
once  would  have  been  considered  ominous,  are  now  ration- 
ally accounted  for.  In  this  way.  things  once  supposed  to  be 
miraculous  also,  may  have  lost  their  supposed  divine  qualities. 

■*  This  much,  however,  i  believ?,  an-3  of  this  much  1  have 


92  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

no  doubt,  that  Paul  and  tbe  other  apostles  were  convinced 
of  the  truth  and  the  salutary  effects  of  the  moral  precepts 
which  had  been  taught  and  practised  by  Christ ;  and  they 
were  willing  to  preach  and  enforce  them  by  all  the  means 
in  their  power,  even  at  the  risk  of  their  lives.  Believing 
this,  and  practising  accordingly,  constituted  them  wise  and 
good  men;  and  happy  would  it  have  been  for  the  christian 
world  if  they  had  always  followed  in  their  steps,  without 
ever  undertaking  to  dictate  to  others,  either  modes  or  forms 
of  worship,  or  to  use  coersive  means  to  compel  men  to  the 
faith. 

u  That  the  apostles  also  believed  in  the  resurrection,  and 
also  in  eternal  life,  I  have  no  doubt ;  this  sentiment,  howev- 
er, was  neither  new  nor  peculiar  to  them,  but  had  been 
held  long  before,  not  only  by  the  pharisees,  among  the 
Jews,  but  by  some  of  the  Grecian  philosophers ;  and  the 
truth  of  it  I  am  not  at  all  disposed  to  dispute  y  yet  never- 
theless, whether  the  evidences  on  which  it  was  founded 
were  not  originally  mere  visionary,  like  the  appearance  of 
Mr  A.  before  mentioned,  is  the  subject  under  consideration. 

"  There  may  be,  and  undoubtedly  are  principles  in  nature 
which  are  not  yet  understood  by  any  ;  and  many  more  which 
are  understood  only  by  a  few.  The  operations  of  these 
principles  would  undoubtedly,  even  at  the  present  day,  ap- 
pear miraculous  to  thousands  ;  and  must  appear  very  extra- 
ordinary to  every  one  until  they  are  understood.  But  this  I  - 
conclude  is  not  what  is  meant  by  miracles.  Respecting 
miracles,  I  have  only  to  ask  myself  this  question,  viz. — 
Which  is  the  most  likely  to  be  true  ;  either  that  men  should 
have  been  honestly  deceived,  in  the  first  instance,  or  other- 
wise facts  should  have  been  so  misrepresented,  that  fabrica- 
tion should  have  been  honestly  believed  for  truth  ;  or  else, 
that  things  so  contrary  to  every  principle  of  which  I  know 
in  nature,  should  have  taken  place  ?  Let  reasen  only  dic- 
tate the  answer. 

H  Another  source  of  evidence  in  support  of  divine  revela- 
tion is  prophecy.  And  here,  notwithstanding  I  think  it  very 
probable  that  much  importance  has  been  attached  to  many 
writings,  under  the  idea  of  their  being  prophetic,  which  are 
nothing  more  than  the  poetic  effusions  of  a  fruitful  imagina- 
tion ;  yet  I  have  long  been  of  opinion  that  there  have  been, 
and  perhaps  still  are  men  in  the  world  who  are  endowed,  by 
nature,  with  gifts  and  faculties  differing  from  men  in  general ; 
and  particularly,  say  if  you  please,  with  a  spirit  of  prophecy, 


SERIES    OP    LETTERS.  93 

which,  however,  I  must  consider  nothing-  less  nor  more  tb?n 
ji  second  or  mental  night.  By  this  sense,  or  faculty  of  seeing, 
they  lire  enabled  to  bring  events  which  are  yet  future,  us 
well  as  those  otherwise  out  of  sight,  present  to  their  minds  ; 
and  thus  they  can  behold  them  with  their  mental  eye,  as 
clearly  as  we  behold  objects  at  a  distance. 

44  This,  you  may  say,  is  visionary  indeed.  And  you  may 
wonder  how  I  can  doubt  of  the  truth  of  miracles,  if  I  can  be- 
h'eve  in  such  a  chimerical  idea  as  this! 

44  But  stop,  my  dear  sir,  you  believe  in  such  a  power  some 
where  or  other;  for  without  it  there  could  be  no  such  thing 
as  prophecy,  and  if  such  a  power  exist,  even  in  the  universe, 
why  may  it  not  exist  in  man?  For  myself,  1  cannot  account 
for  the  spirit  of  prophecy  in  man,  (and  it  must  be  in  man,  or 
else  men  could  not  be  prophets)  in  a  more  rational  way.  I 
should  not  be  disposed,  however,  to  consider  such  a  power, 
sense,  faculty,  o*  by  what  other-  name  it  might  be  called,  ai.v 
mere  supernatural  than  the  organs  of  sight  and  hearing.  !f 
the  natural  eye  is  so  formed  that  objects  may  be  painted  on 
it,  simply  by  the  action  of  vision,  to  the  immense  disUnce  of 
the  fixed  stars,  so  that  we  are  enabled  to  behold  then),  why 
may  not  the  mental  eye  be  so  constituted  as  to  bring  future 
evei-s  present  to  the  mind  with  equal  certainty  ? 

14  If  such  a  power,  however,  were  once  known  to  exist,  it 
would  be  likely  to  be  counterfeited;  and  hence  we  may 
nippose,  arose  that  horde  of  impostors,  by  the  name  of 
soothsayers,  sorcerers,  necromancers,  magicians,  kc. 

41  But  even  where  this  power  exists,  if  it  be  a  natural 
power,  it  must  have  its  limits,  and  seme  may  have  it  to  a 
greater  degree  than  others,  and  also  some  may  make  a  good 
use  of  it,  and  others  bad. 

44  Accounting  for  prophecy  in  this  way,  you  will  readily 
perceive  that  it  is  no  certain  evidence  of  a  future  Slate  ;  ivr 
although  the  tim^  may  come  when  all  creatures  in  ail  the 
vast  dominions  of  God  may  be  made  happy  in  the  enjoy- 
ment of  bis  blessings,  yet  it  does  not  necessarily  follow  that 
you  and  I  shall  exist  at  that  time  !  i.  e.  in  conscious  identity  ! 

44  If  I  am  asked  why  I  wish  to  explain  every  thing  upon 
natural  principles,  without  admitting  the  immediate  agency 
of  the  Deity,  my  only  answer  is,  because  to  my  understand- 
ing it  is  more  rational,  and  of  course  more  likely  to  be  true, 

44  That  men  could  divine,  or  foretell  future  events,  or  de- 
clare present  things  which  are  beyond  their  sight  by  intui- 
tion, all  of  which  seems  to  be  embraced  in  the  word  proj^hc^ 


4  SERIES   OP   LETTfcRg.- 

ey,  is  an  idea  which  has  existed  perhaps  from  time  immemo- 
rial ;  and  however  unaccountable  it  may  seem,  yet,  to  a  cer- 
tain degree,  at  least,  we  are  obliged  to  admit  the  fact ;  but 
whether,  after  all,  this  is  any  thing  more  than  the  effect  of 
that  kind  of  foresight  or  ratiocination,  which  all  men  (idiots 
excepted)  have  to  a  greater  or  less  degree,  but  some  much 
greater  than  others,  is  still  a  question.  But  should  I  be 
obliged  to  admit  the  truth  of  prophecy,  in  the  6ense  in  which 
it  is  generally  understood,  I  should  account  for  it  in  the  way 
jou  have  seen. 

u  I  do  not  perceive,  at  present,  how  a  revelation  could  be 
made  to  the  understanding  of  any  man  only  through  the  me- 
dium of  the  operations  of  nature.  Unless  it  wefo  made  to 
some  of  his  outward  senses,  how  could  he  know  whether  it 
was  any  thing  more  than  a  chimera  of  his  own  brain  ?  If 
there  were  any  faculty  in  his  mind  by  which  he  could  view 
these  things  over  and  over  again,  (the  same  as  we  look  at 
the  Heavenly  bodies)  and  did  he  always  behold  them  in  the 
«ame  light,  then  he  would  feel  safe  in  declaring  that  such 
things  did  exist  ;  and  unless  the  prophets  had  some  such  cri- 
terion by  which  they  could  determine  on  the  truth  of  their 
predictions.  1  do  not  see  how  that  even  they,  and  much  less 
«•«,  should  feel  safe  in  placing  any  real  confidence  in  them. 

"  The  prophecies  of  our  Saviour,  however,  concerning 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  are  more  clear  and  striking 
than  any  thing  else  we  have  of  the  kind;  and  if  it  were  cer- 
tain that  these  were  written  before  the  event  took  place,  it 
would  be  a  very  strong  proof  of  something  more  than  what 
any  one  can  suppose  could  have  been  the  result  of  human 
foresight.  There  must,  at  least,  on  such  a  supposition,  have 
been  a  faculty  of  seeing  which  w:  do  not  possess.  These 
predictions,  however,  if  made  by  Jesus,  must  have  been 
made  in  the  hearing  of  John,  as  well  ns  Matthew;  and  of 
course,  he  must  have  known  them  with  more  certainty  thao 
Mark  or  L,uke  ;  who,  in  consequence  o«f  not  being  personally 
acquainted  with  Jesus,  could  have  known  them  only  from 
hear  say  ;  and  as  it  is  pretty  generally  agreed,  that  John 
wrote  his  gospel  more  than  twenty  years  after  the  event 
took  place,  it  is  very  remarkable  that  he  should  be  entirely 
silent  on  this  subject !  John,  as  we  must  suppose,  knowing 
of  this  prediction  ;  knowing  also  that  it  had  been  recorded 
by  all  three  of  the  other  Evangelists,  (though  Luke  is  not 
very  particular  on  the  subject)  and  knowing  also  that  they 
fcad  all  written  before  the  event  tool*  place  ;  and  fee  living 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  95 

(o  tee  the  whole  verified,  and  then  wrote  h'19  gospel  after- 
wards, how  natural  it  would  have  been  for  him,  first  to  have 
recorded  this  prediction,  at  least,  in  substance,  and  then  to 
have  mentioned  its  fulfillment,  as  a  confirmation  of  the 
prophecy  I     But  not  a  word  on  the  subject. 

"  This,  however,  is  no  evidence  that  Jesus  did  not  deliver 
those  predictions,  and  that  they  were  not  written  by  Mat- 
thew and  Mark,  and  also  hinted  at  by  Luke  before  the  events 
took  place  ;  yet  still  it  raises  a  doubt  and  a  query  in  the 
mind  whether  these  are  not  interpolations,  or  else  the  books 
wholly  written  after  the  events  took  place,  and  of  course 
these  predictions  put  into  the  mouth  of  Jesus  by  the  histo- 
rian. When  the  copies  were  few  in  number,  and  those  kept 
by  the  christians  only,  interpolations  might  have  been  made 
without  much  danger  of  detection.  The  heretics  were  early 
accused  of  interpolating,  altering,  and  forging  the  scriptures  ; 
and  although  they,  i.  e.  the  majority  of  the  believers,  as  it 
is  likely  would  be  very  careful  to  detect  any  thing  which 
contradicted  their  views  in  point  of  doctrine,  yet  whether 
they  would  be  equally  careful  respecting  those  interpola- 
tions which  favoured  the  christian  faith  is  a  question  worthy 
of  consideration. 

"  In  CalmetV  dictionary  of  the  bible,  under  the  word  gog- 
pel,  we  have  an  account  of  between  thirty  and  forty  gospels, 
of  which  he  gives  their  names,  but  none  of  which  are  now 
extant.  Neither  is  there  any  thing,  which  J  now  recollect, 
of  any  disputes  about  the  validity  of  the  writing  of  the  apos- 
tles, except  what  is  merely  traditional,  until  about  the  year 
100,  when  Celsus  undertook  to  disprove  the  whole.  I  may 
be  incorrect,  in  this,  however,  if  I  am,  you  will  correct  me  : 
for  excepting  barely  the  bible,  as  I  have  informed  you  be- 
fore, 1  have  no  books  by  me  on  this  subject. 

11  Another  circumstance  must  be  taken  into  consideration, 
and  which  bears  great  weight  in  my  mind.  That  is,  the 
great  and  astonishing  difference  there  has  been  made  in  the 
state  and  condition  of  mankind  by  the  discovery  or  invention 
of  the  art  of  printing;  an  art  for  which  we  cannot  be  too 
thankful,  nor  too  highly  appreciate  its  benefits.  For  it 
would  be  very  difficult  now  to  realize  the  situation  of  man- 
kind previous  to  the  invention  of  this  art. 

"  Writing,  it  is  true,  as  we  may  rationally  suppose,  was 
carried  to  a  greater  state  of  perfection  at  that  time,  than  it 
is  at  present ;  for  it  was  of  more  use,  yet  its  use  mast  have 
been   very    limited,  and  it  is    reasonable  to  suppose  that  r 


96  SERIES    OV   LETTERS. 

yery  great  proportion  of  the  common  people  could  neither 
read  nor  write.  For  it  could  be  of  but  little  use  to  them,  a? 
they  had  nothing  to  read,  tor  hooks  of  all  descriptions,  and 
upon  all  subject?,  must  have  been,  comparatively,  very 
few.  This  as  you  would  readily  perceive,  would  have  a 
tendency  to  cause  the  common  people  to  place  great  confi- 
dent e  in  any  thing  that  was  written.  Hence,  generally 
speaking,  it  was  sufXiciuit  barely  to  say,  concerning  any 
matter,  yiy^*Tr\ui,   it  is  zcriiten,  to  gain  full  belief. 

"It  i*  with  ii!  ancient  sect*,  as  it  is  with  ancient  nations 
and  kingdoms;  their  history  may  be  traced  hack  until  we 
find  it  veiled  in  mystery,  and  mingled  with  fable.  We  are 
not  to  suppose,  however,  that  those  things  were  done  at  the 
time-,  with  an  intent  to  deceive  ;  but  after  the  events,  what- 
ever they  were,  had  passed  away,  and  the  imagination  had 
been  long  in  opention  respecting  the  traditions  concerning 
then),  they  are  dressed  up  with  all  the  appearance  of  re:^l 
history;  and  might  so  be  construed  and  believed,  were  it 
not  for  improbability.  The  probability  is,  that  when  such 
histories  were  first  written,  they  deceived  no  one,  or  at 
least,  no  one  thought  it  worth  while  to  undertake  to  detect 
-horn,  because,  not  knowing  what  effect  they  would  have, 
they  considered  their  errors  were  of  no  material  conse- 
quence. The  Shaker  Book  has  been  published  nine  years ; 
and  although  I  conclude  that  very  few,  if  any,  except  the 
Shakers  themselves,  believe  the  miracles  therein  record- 
ed ;  yet  no  one  thatl  know  of  has  thought  it  expedient  to 
undertake  to  refute  them.  And  unless  the  sect  should  grow 
to  more  consequence  than  it  is  at  present,  I  presume  that  no 
one  will  give  himself  much  trouble  on  the  subject.  If  it 
should  be  thought  necessary,  however,  to  refute  these  pre- 
tended miracles,  in  order  to  prevent  those  in  scripture  from 
growing  into  disrepute,  then  it  will  alter  the  case. 

"  I  am  perfectly  reconciled  and  willing,  however,  that 
whatever  is  truth  should  be  true  ;  and  have  not  the  least  in- 
clination, even  if  it  were  in  my  power,  to  alter  one  truth  re- 
specting eternity.  This  is  the  state  ofjny  mind  exactly  ,  a 
state  into  which  it  has  been  growing,  gradually,  for  many 
years  ;  and,  strange  as  it  may  seem  to  you,  I  can  assure  you 
in  the  fear  of  that  God  before  whom  I  stand  or  fall,  and  by 
whom  I  have  been  supported  hitherto,  it  is  the  most  happy 
state  of  mind  in  which  mortals  can  be  placed  !  "  Gloria  in 
altissimis  Deo,  et  in  terra  pas  in  homines  benevoletitia." 
Luke  ii.  1 4,  Beza. 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

41  Whatever  may  be  your  opinion  concerning  miracl 
believe  it  must  be  admitted  that  there  was  no  more  01  a 
miracle  in  the  production  of  man,  originally,  than  there  was 
in  the  production  of  other  animals  ;  and  as  nature  has  not 
provided  man  with  clothing  for  the  body,  which  it  does  for 
other  animals,  especially  those  which  inhabit  cold  climates, 
it  is  evident  that  man  was  originally  produced  under  the 
torrid  zone  ;  and  that  he  could  not  have  lived  in  any  other 
part  of  the  world,  had  it  not  been  for  art.  What  alteration 
the  discovery  of  the  arts  has  made  in  the  original  constitu- 
tion of  man,  it  would  be  difficult  now  to  determine. 

<nt  What  man  must  have  been  previous  to  the  discovery  and 
use  of  fire,  is  difficult  now  to  conceive.  We  can  trace  man 
down,  however,  from  grade  io  grade,  until  we  are  at  a  loss 
to  determine  whether  such  a  race  of  beings  belongs  to  the 
human  species. 

"  I  have  long  desired,  and  should  be  glad  if  some    one  of 
•ufficient  learning   and    skill  would   point  out  to   me   the 
line  of  demonstration   between  the  human  and  brutal  crea- 
tion ;  and  say  where  the  human  ends,  and  where  the  brutal 
begins  ! 

"  Naturalists  take  care  to  say  but  little  on  this  subject, 
and  I  believe  the  task  would  be  more  difficult  than  whal 
people  in  general  imagine. 

14  Come  then,  ye  leaned,  ye  great  and  wise, 
Unfold  the  soul  to  mortal  eyes  ; 
Say  where  eternal  life  shall  end, 
Or  where  eternal  death  begins  ! 
For  death  eternal  theirs  must  be, 
Whose  souls  no  future  life  shall  see  ! 
And  why  should  mortals  vainly  weep 
For  creatures  wrapt  in  endless  sleep  ? 
They've  had  their  day,  they've  had  their  blisj. 
Their  life,  their  joy,  and  happiness, 
And  now  must  we  forever  mourn, 
Because  their  life  will  not  return  ! 

"  O  foolish  man  !  go,  and  be  wise  ! 
Learn  where  the  source  of  greatness  lies  ; 
To  be  content  is  to  be  blest : 
A  cure  for  woes  is  endless  rest. 
If  God  be  good  to  all  the  race 
Of  animals  before  his  face, 
Although  the  life  of  some  be  short, 
(One  day  begins  and  ends  their  sport") 
Shall  we  presume  he  is  less  kind 
To  human  souls  of  nobler  mind, 
9 


98    -,  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

Unless  be  lengthen  out  their  days 
To  endless  years  in  future  maze  ? 

11  It  cannot  be  !  His  love  is  such, 
Whate'er  he  gives,  little  or  much, 
Is  always  good  :  faith,  hope,  desires  ; 
Or  any  grace  which  he  inspires. 
All,  all  are  good  :  for  man  indeed, 
(Whilst  here)  such  gifts,  such  helps  may  need  ! 
All  bring  him  to  his  final  goal, 
Where  nature^  law  winds  up  the  whole  ! 

11  But  you  will  say,  does  God  inspire  man  with  faith  and 
hope  barely  to  deceive  him  ;  and  does  he  not  mean  that  he 
should  ever  realize  the  c  things  hoped  for?'  which  must  be 
(he  case,  unless  the  hope  is  founded  on  a  reality.  Answer. 
Let  us  rather  say,  unless  the  hope  be  a  reality.  The  hope 
of  man  is  in  fact  a  reality,  as  much  so  as  any  thing"  else  which 
exists.  It  is,  however,  what  it  is,  i.  e.  hope  ;  and  not  what  is 
not,  i.  e.  the  l  things  hoped  for.'  But  hope  never  deceives 
any  one,  it  continues  as  long  as  the  creature  has  any  use  for 
it  ;  and  it  is  never  taken  away  from  any  (except  a  disorder- 
ed mind,  to  which  all  men  are  liable)  as  long  as  it  can  be  of 
any  service  to  the  creature. 

"  That  hope  is  given  for  thy  blessing  now." — Pope. 

u  Mankind,  if  ever,  are  very  seldom  made  unhappy  and 
wretched  in  consequence  of  doubting  the  existence  of  a  fu- 
ture state.  Thousands,  no  doubt,  think  they  should  be 
wretched  in  this  condition  :  but,  although  I  have  been  ac- 
quainted with  a  number  of  this  description,  I  never  saw  one 
made  unhappy  in  consequence.  It  is  the  fear  of  endless  mis- 
ery which  produces  so  much  wretchedness  in  the  world. — 
This  idea,  it  is  true,  beggars  all  description  !  It  produces 
that  fear  which  hath  torment.  It  disturbs  the  brain  ;  de- 
stroys the  mental  faculties ;  and,  by  distracting  the  imagina- 
tion, fills  the  soul  with  horror!  It  is  infinitely  more  to  be 
dreaded  than  endless  death !  But  what  fear  or  dread  can 
there  be  in  the  idea  of  endless  sleep  ?  Surely  none.  People 
are  too  apt  to  confound  the  idea  of  the  absence  of  immor- 
tality with  endless  misery,  believing  this  to  be  the  only  al- 
ternative. This  is  not  correct.  Mortality  and  death  are 
the  only  opposites  to  immortality  and  eternal  life  The 
former  I  know  is  true,  and  yet  I  am  satisfied  with  knowing, 
(i.  e.  for  an  absolute  certainty)  nothing  further  ;  neverthe- 


SERIES    OP    LETTERS.  99 

less,  as  1  feel  truly  thankful  for  my  present  existence,  should 
I  be  so  happily  disappointed  as  to  find  all  my  doubts,  found- 
ed in  error,  I  trust,  as  I  should  be  inexpressibly  happy,  so  I 
should  be  inexpressibly  thankful  for  a  future  life.'1 

"  Yours,  &c.  A.  KNEELAND." 


LETTER  VI. 

Dear  sir,  and  brother, — In  replying  to  your  seventh  num- 
ber, 1  propose  taking  the  advantage  which  you  have  favour- 
ed me  with,  by  the  division  of  your  subject.  I  hope  by  this, 
to  be  able  to  compress  my  remarks  on  your  reasoning,  and 
avoid  any  unnecessary  protraction  of  this  epistle. 

You  allow,  that  a  "general  view  of  the  whole  ground" 
on  which  the  scriptures  seem  to  rest,  would  be  sufficient  to 
support  the  truth  of  divine  revelation,  were  it  not  for  the 
following  considerations. 

1.  Mankind,  in  all  ages  of  the  world,  have  been,  and  still 
are  prone  to  superstition. 

2.  It  cannot  be  denied,  but  that  a  part  of  mankind,  at 
least,  have  believed,  and  still  are  believing  in  miracles  and 
revelations  which  are  spurious. 

3.  The  facts  on  which  revelation  is  predicated,  are  un- 
like every  thing  of  which  we  have  any  positive  knowledge. 

If  I  rightly  apprehend  your  meaning  of  M  the  whole 
ground"  in  which  the  scriptures  seem  to  rest,  a  general 
view  of  which  would  be  sufficient  to  support  a  belief  in 
revelation,  were  it  not  for  the  three  considerations  above 
quoted  ;  it  occupies,  at  least,  prophecies  concerning  a  Mes« 
siah  and  the  fulfillment  of  those  prophecies  by  a  Messiah, 
according  to  the  account  which  we  have  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment. 

As  it  will  serve  to  circumscribe  the  bounds  of  our  present 
reasoning,  it  is  thought  best  to  direct  our  inquiry  to  the  con- 
sideration of  the  facts  recorded  in  the  New  Testament,  pre- 
suming if  these  be  admitted,  the  prophecies  will  not  be  de- 
nied.    But 

Have  I  not  occasion,  sir,  to  be  surprised  to  find  your  first 
proposition  adduced  as  evidence  unfavourable  to  the  chris- 
tian scriptures  ?  Was  there  ever  a  time  when  the  world  oi 
human  kind,  both  Jews  and  Gentiles,  was  more  deeply  in- 
volved in  the  darkness  and  stupidity  of  superstition  than 
when  the  Messiah  entered  on  his  public  ministry?     If  the 


*4>0  fcfcMES    «F    LETTEftS. 

doctrine  of  Jesus  had  been  p}easing  to  the  superstitiou* 
Jew*,  if  it  had  accorded  with  the  idolatrous  notions  of  the 
Gentiles,  (which  was  impossible)  if  his  Messiahship  had 
been  espoused  by  both,  and  by  their  consent  and  influence 
had  been  handed  down,  and  declared  to  h*ve  been  evidenced 
by  all  the  miracles  recorded  in  the  four  Evangelists,  do  you 
not  see  that  your  first  proposition  would  be  of  Herculean 
strength  against  this  religion  ?  On  the  contrary,  it  being 
well  established,  from  unquestionable  authority,  that  as  St. 
Paul  observed  ;  Christ  crucified  was  a  stumbling  block  to 
fhe  Jews,  and  to  the  Greeks  foolishness,  the  whole  force  of 
Jewish  and  Greek  superstition,  as  it  opposed,  serves  to 
strengthen  the  evidences  of  our  faith. 

Will  you  be  so  good  as  to  read  the  account  which  is  re- 
corded of  the  miracle  which  Jesus  wrought  in  giving  sight 
to  the  man  who  was  born  blind,  and  inquire  carefully  from 
beginning  to  end  for  any  thing  that  looks  in  the  least  as  if 
tiVj  writer  was  endeavouring  to  write  a  falsehood  in  a  way 
to  have  it  deceive  the  reader.  This  request  might,  as  i 
humbly  conceive,  be  made  in  respect  to  any  of  the  other 
miracles;  but  what  I  had  in  view,  particularly  when  this 
subject  came  to  my  mind,  was  the  following  words,  spoken 
by  the  pharisees  to  him  who  had  been  blind  ;  "  Thou  art 
his  disciple  :  but  we  are  Moses'  disciples.  YVe  know  that 
God  spake  unto  Moses  ;  as  for  this  fellow  we  know  not  from 
whence  he  is."  Is  it  not  plain  from  this  as  well  as  from 
many  other  scriptures,  that  in  the  same  degree  that  the 
pharisees'  superstition  run  in  favour  of  Moses,  it  operated 
against  Jesus  ?  1  know  the  objector  may  say,  the  Jews  ex- 
pected a  Messiah ;  but  then  they  did  not  expect  such  a 
character  as  was  Jesus.  They  also  expected  Elias  to  come 
first,  but  they  did  not  expect  such  a  character  as  John.  You 
and  all  the  world  know  that  the  protestant  clergy  in  Europe 
and  America  used  to  pray  fur  the  downfall  of  the  Pope  ;  but 
when  he  was  humbled,  they  all  joined  in  fervent  prayer  to 
set  him  up  again.  How  did  this  inconsistency  happen  ?  An- 
swer. The  way  in  which  it  pleased  God  to  humble  the 
Pope,  was  not  the  way  which  clerical  wisdom  and  prudence 
had  planned;  and  we  all  see  now,  that  they  are  better 
pleased  with  the  Pope  and  the  Inquisition,  than  they  were 
to  have  him  lose  his  power  in  a  way  which  endangered  their 
own.  Now,  sir,  if  liberal  principles  do  obtain,  and  if  the 
cause  of  civil  and  religious  liberty  should  finally  triumph,  in 
spite  of  popish  and  protestant  clergy  with  monarchy  unjted, 


SERIES   OF    LETTERS.  101 

do  you  believe  that  this  triumph  will  ever  be  imputed  to 
the  superstition  of  king-craft  and  priestcraft  ?  On  the  ground 
of  your  first  proposition  this  would  be  your  conclusion.  The 
pharisees  and  those  who  adhered  to  them,  built  the  sepul- 
chres of  the  prophets,  whom  their  fathers  killed,  and  said  ; 
*'  If  we  had  been  in  the  days  of  our  fathers,  we  would  not 
have  been  partakers  with  them  in  the  blood  of  the  proph 
ets."  These  holy  men  were  sure  that  they  were  much 
better  than  their  fathers  who  persecuted  the  prophets ; 
they  had  no  disposition  to  persecute;  ail  the  wealth  in  the 
world  could  not  have  tempted  these  godly  saints  to  kill  a 
prophet  of  God.  However,  St.  Paul  writing  to  the  Thessa- 
lonians,  says,  "  For  ye,  brethren,  became  followers  of  the 
churches  of  God,  which  in  Judea  are  in  Christ  Jesus  :  for  ye 
also  have  suffered  like  things  of  your  own  countrymen,  even 
as  they  have  of  the  Jews  ;  who  both  killed  the  Lord  Jesus 
and  their  own  prophets,  and  have  persecuted  us  ;  and  they 
please  not  God,  and  are  contrary  to  all  men."  But  the  Jews 
would  not  have  put  Jesus  to  death  if  he  had  been  a  phari- 
see,  and  had  not  departed  from  their  traditions  and  supersti- 
tions. But  he  was  not  a  pharisee,  nor  did  he  adhere  to 
their  superstitions ;  and  for  this  cause  he  was  to  them  "  a 
root  out  of  dry  ground."  To  them,  he  had  no  form  nor 
comeliness,  no,  nor  had  he  an}'  beauty  that  they  should  dis- 
cern him.  Say,  brother,  is  not  this  the  superstition  which 
you  are  urging  as  unfavourable  to  the  evidences  of  Chris- 
tianity ?  And  does  not  the  passage  above  quoted  from  Thes- 
salonians  go  to  prove  what  all  ecclesiastical  history  as  well 
as  the  New  Testament  proves,  that  the  christians  were  per- 
secuted by  the  Jews  and  by  the  Gentiles  ?  Did  any  thing 
but  superstition  ever  persecute  ?  It  surely  does  not  aim  to 
build  up  that  which  it  persecutes  :  and  therefore  in  room  of 
its  being  evidence  against  the  genuineness  of  what  it  oppos- 
es, is  justly  admitted  as  a  valid  evidence  in  its  favour.  It  is 
well  known  that  our  christian  doctors,  clergy,  and  laity  have 
been  long  persuaded  that  a  glorious  day  of  universal  peace 
and  gospel  light  is  not  only  promised,  but  fast  approaching ; 
and  if  their  prayers  have  any  influence,  it  is  evident  that  the 
time  is  hastened  by  their  means.  All  this  looks  very  well, 
and  a  man  would  be  thought  to  be  impious,  if  not  insane, 
who  should  intimate  that  these  saints  were  superstitous  or 
illiberal,  or  that  they  possessed  the  spirit  of  persecution. — 
But  what  has  been  their  spirit  for,  say,  twenty-five  years 
past  towards  a  doctrine  which  teaches  universal  peace  on 
9* 


J  02  series  of  letters; 

earth  and  good  will  towards  man  ?  Is  there  any  thing  bad 
which  they  have  not  spoken  against  this  doctrine  ?  Have 
they  not  treated  its  preachers  with  all  the  contempt  and 
even  ridicule  of  which  they  were  capable  ?  Have  they  not 
used  all  their  influence  to  keep  the  doctrine  from  being 
preached  in  their  meeting  houses,  and  have  they  not  dealt 
with  church  members  who  have  believed  this  benign  doc- 
trine of  love,  with  excommunications  attended  with  as  many 
agravations  as  they  could  invent  ?  In  a  word,  is  there  one 
bitter  herb  in  all  the  ground  which  was  cursed  for  man's 
sake,  that  has  not  been  used  against  what  is  called  the  poison 
of  this  abominable  heresy  ?  If  they  had  the  power  of  the 
pope,  if  the  inquisition  were  at  their  cemmand,  would  they 
let  such  power  lie  dormant  for  want  of  zeal  ?  Balaam  smote 
his  ass  with  a  staff,  but  said  :  "  I  would  there  were  a  sword 
in  mine  hand,  for  now  would  I  kill  thee." 

But  after  all  that  has  been  said  and  done  against  this  doc- 
trine of  universal  benevolence  and  grace,  its  progress  con- 
founds its  enemies,  encourages  its  friends,  and  calls  to  mind 
the  parable  of  the  mustard  seed.  Suppose  for  a  century  to 
come  it  should  continue  its  advances  according  to  what  it 
has  gained  for  the  twenty-five  years  above  mentioned,  is  it 
not  evident  that  the  knowledge  of  God  would  cover  the 
earth  as  the  waters  cover  the  sea  ?  But  would  any  body 
then,  being  acquainted  with  the  history  of  these  times,  think 
of  making  use  of  the  superstition  of  our  clergy  to  oppose  the 
evidences  of  this  doctrine  ?  Would  such  a  one  say,  it  is 
probable  that  in  those  times  of  superstition,  the  clergy  who 
had  great  influence  with  the  common  people,  might  alter 
many  passages  of  scripture,  and  in  room  of  using  the  word 
elect,  interpolate  the  words  all  men  ?  If  I  understand  your 
argument,  this  is  the  use  you  make  of  superstition.  But,  sir, 
I  am  satisfied  that  the  superstition  of  our  times  will  be  suffi- 
cient proof  to  future  ages,  that  the  scriptures  which  so  abun- 
dantly prove  the  doctrine  of  universal  salvation,  were  not 
the  production  of  a  superstitious  clergy  who  were  known  to 
oppose  this  doctrine  with  all  their  learning  and  influence. 

Now  if  you  please,  you  may  indulge  in  strengthening  your 
hypothesis,  and  prove  by  the  faithful  histories  of  different 
nations,  that  Jews,  Greeks,  and  Romans  were  most  stupidly 
superstitious.  Also  that  India,  Turkey,  and  Arabia  are  now 
groaning  under  the  ponderous  weight  of  this  vanity.  Go  on 
and  enlarge  on  all  that  you  have  said,  and  point  t>ut  all  the 
superstitions  of  which  we  read  or  know;  show  how  power- 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  J  03 

ful  this  superstition  is  in  the  human  heart ;  how  it  render? 
its  votaries  blind  to  reason  and  the  principles  of  moral  truth  : 
show  how  hard  it  is  to  break  in  upon  this  almost  invincible 
phalanx  ;  but  consider,  sir,  the  blacker  you  represent  thii 
cloud,  the  brighter  you  render  the  evidences  of  the  religion 
of  Jesus. 

You  need  not  be  informed,  what  the  christian  world  all 
knows,  that  the  doctrine  of  Jesus  Christ,  founded  on  the 
miracles  recorded  in  the  four  Evangelists  and  in  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles,  was  propagated  among  Jews  and  Gentiles, 
whose  superstitions,  though  various,  rendered  them  both 
hostile  to  this  new  religion,  and  incited  them  to  persecution? 
which  subjected  the  "  weak  and  defenceless  disciples  of  the 
meek  and  lowly  Jesus"  to  trials  and  sufferings,  fears  and 
temptations  of  which  we  can  have  but  a  faint  conception. — 
The  grand  hypothesis  on  which  the  gospel  was  advocated, 
and  by  which  it  succeeded  in  obtaining  vast  multitudes  of 
Jewish  as  well  as  Gentile  converts,  was  the  resurrection  of 
Jesus,  who  was  publicly  executed  on  a  cross  by  the  Roman 
authority  instigated  by  the  rulers  of  the  Jews.  All  this  must 
be  accounted  for  in  a  rational  way.  The  facts  are  as  well 
attested  as  any  thing  of  which  history  gives  any  account. 
The  four  gospels  have  been  commented  on,  and  quoted,  and 
adverted  too  by  a  greater  number  of  controversial  writers, 
than  any  other  book  of  which  we  have  any  knowledge  The 
epistles  of  St.  Paul  when  compared  with  the  Acts  and  with 
each  other  have  all  the  necessary  characteristics  of  being 
genuine,  and  of  relating  nothing  but  realties. 

You,  sir,  allow  that  the  authority  on  which  this  religion 
rests,  would  be  sufficient  to  support  it,  if  it  were  not  for  the 
consideratioa  of  your  three  propositions,  the  first  of  which, 
1  trust,  you  will  acknowledge  stands  in  its  vindication. 

Your  second  proposition  may  now  be  noticed. 

That  part  of  mankind  have  believed  and  still  are  believing 
in  miracles  and  revelations  which  are  spurious,  we  have  no 
interest  in  denying,  but  we  feel  under  no  obligation  to  admit 
this  fact  as  any  evidence  against  Christianity,  or  of  any  force 
to  counterbalance  the  evidences  which  stand  in  its  favour. 
What  would  you  think  of  such  kind  of  reasoning  as  should 
contend,  that  as  it  is  evident  that  many  have  been,  and  still 
are  imposed  on  by  counterfeit  money,  it  justifies  serious 
doubts  whether  there  ever  was  any  true  money  in  the 
world  ?  Would  you  not  reply,  that  as  the  counterfeit  is  en- 
tirely dependent  on  the  true  for  its  imposition,  in  room  of  bo 


]04  SERIES    OK    LETTEfc?. 

ing  evidence  that  there  is  no  true  money,  it  demonstrates 
that  there  is  ? 

It  being  well  known,  nor  ever  doubted  bv  the  friends  or 
enemies  of  Christianity,  that  its  founder  and  his  apostles 
proved  the  divinity  of  their  missions  by  miracles  alone,  it 
was  nothing  more  than  might  be  rationally  expected,  that 
impostors  would  rise  up  under  those  sacred  pretensions,  with 
a  view  to  establish  themselves.  But  if  this  religion  of  Jesus 
Christ,  had  not  at  first  been  built  upon  this  foundation,  im- 
postors would  never  have  thought  of  imposing  on  people 
with  such  pretensions.  Impostors,  therefore,  together  with 
all  their  deceptions,  cannot,  as  I  humbly  conceive,  be  ad- 
mitted as  evidence  against  the  genuineness  of  the  gospel, 
but  in  favour  of  it. 

As  to  Mahomet  of  whom  you  speak,  I  have  always  under- 
stood that  he  made  no  pretensions  to  miracles.  He  pre- 
tended to  hold  correspondence  with  the  angel  Gabriel, 
and  to  receive  revelations  from  God  in  this  way  ;  but  he 
never  attempted  to  sanction  his  divinity  by  miracles;  and 
indeed  there  was  no  need  of  this,  for  he  declared  he  was 
commissioned  from  heaven  to  propagate  his  religion  by  the 
sword,  and  to  destroy  the  monuments  of  idolatry.  His  king- 
dom was  of  this  world,  therefore  did  his  servants  fight;  but 
they  did  not  fight  always  alone,  for  he  fought  at  nine  battles 
or  sieges  in  person,  and  in  ten  years  achieved  fifty  military 
enterprizes.  He  united  religion  and  plunder,  by  which  he 
allured  the  vagrant  Arabs  to  his  standard.  He  asserted  that 
the  sword  was  the  key  of  heaven  and  hell;  that  a  drop  of 
blood  shed  in  the  cause  of  God,  a  night  spent  in  arms  are  of 
more  account  than  two  months  of  fasting  and  prayer.  He 
assured  those  who  should  fail  in  battle,  that  their  sins  should 
be  forgiven  at  the  day  of  judgment,  that  their  wounds  would 
be  resplendant  as  vermillion  and  odoriferous  as  myrrh,  and 
that  the  loss  of  limbs  should  be  supplied  by  the  wings  of  an- 
gels and  cherubim.  But  what  you  can  find  in  Mahometism 
which  in  the  least  militates  against  the  evidences  of  Christi- 
anity I  know  not.  It  is  affirmed  by  writers,  that  he  collect- 
ed his  ideas  of  God  and  of  morals  from  the  Hebrew  and 
christian  scriptures. 

From  Mahomet  you  go  to  the  conversion  of  Constantine, 
taking  particular  notice  of  the  account  given  of  his  seeing 
the  sign  of  a  cross  in  the  sun,  &c.  And  as  we  are  now  on 
the  subject  of  miracles,  we  must  not  forget  the  miracles  of 
the  Shakers  which  seem  to  shake  vour  faith  !     Two  notable 


SERIES    OP    LETTERS.  105 

miracle*  you  hare  honoured  with  a  place  in  your  epistle,  or 
honoured  your  epistle  with  (hem,  which,  I  shall  not  under* 
take  to  determine.  A  bridge  fell  with  a  horse  on  it,  which 
fell  with  the  bridge  ;  the  rider  was  a  woman  ;  by  thd  fall 
several  of  her  ribs  were  broken,  and  she  was  otherwise 
bruised  ;  hut  she  was  miraculously  recovered  so  as  to  be 
able  to  dance  in  one  evening1.  A  boy  cut  his  foot,  the  wound 
bled  profusely;  the  boy  was  miraculously  healed  in  a  few 
hours,  These  are  the  miracles ;  but  whether  mother  Ann, 
or  some  of  her  elders  performed  these  miracles,  you  do  not 
inform  me.  It  seems  to  be  allowed  that  m^st  of  these  Quak- 
er miracles  are  inferior  to  the  miracles  recorded  in  the  New 
Testament,  but  not  more  inferior  to  them,  than  they  are  to 
the  miracles  of  Moses. 

Doctor  Priestley,  with  his  usual  candor,  endeavours  to 
assign  a  natural  cause  for  what  Constantino  saw,  and  you  are 
inclined  to  his  opinion,  to  all  of  which  I  have  no  objections 
to  make;  and  I  am  by  no  means  certain,  that  a  proper  at- 
tention to  the  pretended  miracles  of  the  Shakers,  might  not 
ittfM  in  assigning  a  natural  cause  for  them.  But  however 
this  may  be,  I  cannot  see  how  the  matter  affects  our  belief 
in  Jesus  Christ.  Do  vou  not  discover  a  difference  too  wide 
between  the  case  of  Jesus  and  his  doctrine,  and  Ann  Lee 
and  her  principles  to  admit  of  the  comparison  which  you 
seem  inclined  to  make  ?  You  have  also  mentioned  the  case 
of  Mrs.  A 's  seeing  her  husband  and  talking  with  him  af- 
ter he  was  dead,  which  yon  would  draw  into  the  same  com- 
parison.    That  Mrs.  A may  have  satisfactory  evidence 

of  her  having  seen  and  conversed  with  her  husband  since  his 
death,  I  am  not  at  all  disposed  to  dispute  ;  but  here  the  mat- 
ter ends.  God  has  not  seen  fit  to  endue  her  with  the  power 
€>(  working  miracles.  If  this  woman  should  come  into  a  pub- 
lic assembly  and  work  astonishing  miracles  before  all  the 
people  as  an  attestation  of  her  having  seen  her  husband, 
and  you  and  I  should  be  present,  and  see  these  marvellous 
things  with  our  own  eyes  should  we  doubt  the  woman's  tes- 
timony ? 

I  have  already,"  in  a  former  communication  shown  that 
the  declaration  of  the  apostles  of  the  resurrection  of  Jesus, 
until  it  was  accompanied  with  power  from  on  high,  was 
never  even  communicated  to  the  public,  or  ordered  to  be 
communicated.  But  in  fact  the  disciples  were  strictly  com- 
manded to  tarry  at  Jerusalem  until  the  gift  of  the  Hory 
Spirit. 


106  SERIES   OF   LETTERS. 

Constantine  would  have  had  no  occasion  to  depose  under 
the  solemnity  of  an  oath,  concerning  the  sign  of  the  cross, 
&c.  if  he  had  had  power  to  evidence  his  declaration  by  mir- 
acles. If  Ann  Lee's  disciples  will  heal  the  sick,  restore  the 
lame,  and  raise  the  dead  in  so  puhlic  a  manner  that  the  peo- 
ple at  large  may  know  these  facts,  then,  sir,  they  will  no 
longer  need  to  purchase  poor  children  in  order  to  increase 
their  societies.  And  if  God  should  see  fit  to  call  me  from 
my  wife  and  children  by  such  evidences  as  these,  1  hope  I 
should  not  disobey  his  divine  mandate. 

But  will  you  reply,  that  miracles  having  ceased,  we  have 
ro  right  to  expect  them  ?  In  return  it  may  be  asked,  how 
we  are  assured  that  miracles  are  not  now  necessary  as  they 
were  twenty  or  thirty  years  ago  ?  Will  you  retort  this  ques- 
tion and  ask  why  miracles  are  not  now  as  necessary  to 
evince  the  truth  of  Christianity  as  in  the  days  of  Jesus  and 
his  apostles?  To  this  we  reply;  the  miracles  on  which  the 
gospel  was  founded,  or  propagated,  were  of  the  most  extra- 
ordinary kind  ;  they  were  of  extensive  publicity,  and  of  ocu- 
lar notoriety  ;  they  were  vastly  numerous,  extending  to  the 
infirmed  of  all  descriptions ;  and  they  were  continued  long 
enough  to  answer  the  purpose  for  which  they  were  in- 
tended. 

You  will  feel  satisfied  that  the  enemies  of  Jesus  and  his 
apostles  knew  for  certainty,  that  those  miracles  wrought  by 
*hem  were  realities  ;  and  that  they,  in  room  of  imputing 
them  to  the  divine  agency,  violated  their  own  reason,  by  re- 
ferring to  an  evil  agent  such  power  and  acts  of  goodness;  I 
say  you  will  feel  satisfied  of  ali  this,  if  you  will  set  down  and 
read  all  the  accounts  relative  to  this  subject,  in  the  four  gos- 
pels, carefully  regarding  this  question :  Do  these  writers 
discover  any  marks  of  deception  or  fraud? 

In  no  instance  do  the  evangelists  betray  the  least  anxiety 
for  fear  what  they  relate  will  not  be  credited.  Even  when 
they  pen  the  astonishing  miracles  of  which  they  pretend  to 
be  eye  witnesses,  they  make  no  pause  to  clear  up  any  thing  ; 
but  tell  the  whole  as  if  the  whole  was  publicly  known.  In 
a  word,  this  history,  this  sacred  testimony,  carries  its  own 
competent  evidence  within  itself. 

If  has  been  noticed  by  those  who  have  written  on  this 
subject,  as  evidence  that  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John 
were  the  real  authors  of  those  books  which  bear  their  re- 
ar ective  names,  that  a  great  many  passages  are  alluded  to 
or  quoted  from  the  evangelists,  exactly  as  we  read  them 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  J  07 

now,  by  a  regular  succession  of  christian  writers,  from  the 
time  of  the  apostles  down  to  this  hour  ;  and  at  a  very  early 
period  their  names  are  mentioned  as  the  authors  of  their  re- 
spective gospels ;  which  is  more  than  can  he  said  of  anv 
other  historian  whatever.  See  Lardner  and  Paley.  I  will 
not  call  up  Ann  Lee  in  this  place,  but  I  will  suppose  an  at- 
tempt should  be  made  now  in  New-England  to  convince 
Trinitarians  of  the  error  of  supposing  there  are  three  per- 
sons in  the  Godhead.  This  shall  be  undertaken  by  men 
who  are  wicked  enough  to  attempt  lo  deceive  by  pretended 
miracles.  One  is  selected  as  a  leader,  and  the  others  to  the 
number  of  twelve  profess  to  be  his  followers.  The  leader 
pretends  to  a  revelation  from  God,  the  substance  .of  which  is, 
that  Jesus  Christ  is  a  created  being  and  dependent  on  the 
Father.  This  doctrine  he  preaches  and  directs  his  follow- 
ers to  go  into  every  town  in  New-England  and  proclaim  this 
truth  to  the  people,  and  exhort  them  to  repent  of  their  for- 
mer doctrine  and  turn  to  God.  This  impostor  pretends  to 
work  miracles  in  confirmation  of  his  divine  mission;  and  also 
pretends  to  give  his  disciples  power  to  work  miracles.  He 
informs  his  frends  that  he  is  to  lose  his  life  and  that  thev 
must  lose  theirs,  in  order  to  establish  this  doctrine.  Stop, 
we  have  come  to  an  absurdity.  Who  would  undertake  to 
deceive  their  fellow  creatures  for  no  other  reward  than  the 
loss  of  their  lives  ?  But  let  us  pursue  on.  This  leader  pre- 
tends to  give  sight  to  blind  people,  to  heal  the  sick  with  a 
word,  and  to  raise  the  dead.  It  is  reported  all  round  the 
country  that  many  such  cases  have  actually  taken  place ; 
that  the  blind  do  receive  their  sight,  the  sick  are  raised  to 
health  at  once,  and  one  man  in  particular  who  was  dead  four 
days,  has  been  called  out  of  his  grave.  People  now  are 
'waked  up  ;  many  believe  the  reports  :  thousands  are  flock- 
ing frum  place  to  place  to  hear  this  man  and  to  see  hi*  mira- 
cles. In  this  case  who  would  be  most  likely  lo  piace  t hem- 
selves  very  near  to  this  pretender?  Who  would  one  expect 
to  find  near  his  person  ?  Answer,  some  of  the  Trinitarians  ; 
chosen  ones  too;  men  of  sound  judgment,  and  who  could  be 
depended  on  as  able  to  detect  any  fraud.  How  long  is  it 
reasonable  to  suppose  these  pretensions  could  possibly  con- 
tinue with  any  success  ?  It  may  be  asked  likewise,  whether 
all  honest,  reasonable,  and  candid  Unitarians  would  not  ex- 
press their  abhorrence  of  such  pretensions?  Are  you,  sir, 
of  opinion  that  such  a  fraud  could  possibly  be  managed  in  a 
way  to  insure  success  ?  A  moment1*  reflections  is  sufficient 
to  put  the  question  to  re»t. 


108  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

But  we  will  still  pursue  our  supposition.  The  Trinita- 
rians enter  a  complaint  against  this  teacher,  to  the  authori- 
ties, alleging  that  he  is  'guilty  of  treason;  he  is  arrested, 
convicted,  and  publicly  executed.  At  the  time  of  his  arrest 
his  disciples  all  forsake  him,  and  one  being  found  near  him 
denies  that  he  knows  the  man.  All  is  over  now,  and  people 
50  about  their  common  avocations  ;  once  in  a  while  a  word 
or  two  may  be  dropped  on  the  subject  of  the  impostor,but  the 
thing-  is  dying  away,  till  sit  at  once  the  twelve  disciples  of 
him  who  was  executed  came  boldly  before  the  public  and 
proclaim  the  resurrection  of  their  leader,  charge  the  rulers 
of  the  people  of  having  murdered  him,  and  declare  that 
God  has  raised  him  from  the  dead,  and  appointed  them  to  be 
witness  of  this  to  the  people,  and  to  preach  Unitarianism. 
What  would  be  thought  of  these  men?  Would  the  doctrine 
of  the  divine  unit)'  be  likely  to  triumph  over  its  opposite, 
the  Trinity,  by  the  preaching  of  the  twelve  ?  Would  there 
be  any  attention  paid  to  these  men,  except  by  authority,  to 
disperse  them  and  cause  them  to  desist  from  such  madness, 
and  go  about  some  honest  business  ?  But  now  they  pretend 
to  work  miracles  in  confirmation  of  the  truth  of  the  resur- 
rection !  Enough.  Suppose,  sir,  I  should  tell  you  that  I 
believe  such  pretensions  might  be  so  managed  as  to  succeed 
completely,  would  you  not  reply,  that  the  success  of  such 
pretensions  being  altogether  a  fraud,  would  itself  be  as  great 
a  miracle  as  is  recorded  in  scripture,  with  the  addition  of 
absurdity  ?  You  will  remember  that  you  suggested  that  it 
would  require  a  miracle  to  dissuade  me  from  my  belief;  and 
J  hope  you  will  see  that  you  must  believe  in  a  miracle  in  or- 
der not  to  believe  with  me  ! 

Will  you  say  that  the  foregoing  doe's  not  come  to  the  diffi- 
culty, that  the  question  is,  was  not  the  account  we  have  of 
those  things  in  the  gospels,  forged  long  since  the  days  in 
which  they  are  represented  to  have  taken  place?  Then, 
sir,  in  room  of  the  above  supposed  fraud,  undertaken  to 
propagate  Unitarianism,  you  may  take  the  supposition  of  a 
forged  book  published  by  the  friends  of  that  doctrine,  in 
which  just  such  a  story  is  told  of  the  first  propagations  of 
the  sentiment  as  is  told  in  the  New  Testament  of  Jesus  and 
his  apostles — and  the  Trinitarians  shall  be  made  to  act  the 
pait  of  the  old  pharisees..  Can  you,  sir,  conceive  that  the 
book  would  meet  with  any  better  success  than  the  impos- 
tors themselves  ?  Would  our  learned  doctors  of  the  Trini- 
tarian school  be  silent  while  6uch  a  book  was  in  circulation  ? 


SERIES    OF    LETTER?.  109 

Would  they  sufter  it  to  be  handed  down  to  posterity  unan- 
swered and  unrefuted?  Would  they  see  their  churches  im- 
posed on  in  this  way,  their  doctrine  sat  at  nought,  and  this 
most  extravagant  imposture  obtain  credit  ?  Ask  likewise  on 
the  other  side  ;  would  honest  Unitarians  pay  any  attention  to 
such  a  book  ?  Would  they  impose  on  their  fellow  creatures 
in  this  way  ?  Would  they  instruct  their  children  to  believe 
what  they  knew  to  be  a  lie  ? 

It  should  be  kept  in  mind  that  when  the  gospels  were 
written  and  for  more  than  two  hundred  years  afterwards, 
Christianity  was  hated  and  persecuted  beyond  what  we  can 
easily  conceive,  by  the  emperors  of  Rome  and  their  wicked 
governors,  who  being  authorized  by  special  edicts  for  that 
purpose  put  to  the  most  cruel  tortures  and  horrid  deaths  the 
followers  of  Jesus.  The  superstitious  priests  of  heathen 
idols,  were  constantly  active  with  all  possible  inventions  cal- 
culated to  excite  jealousies  and  sharpen  the  edge  of  perse- 
cution against  a  doctrine  that  was  calculated  to  subvert  their 
order  and  demolish  their  temples.  It  was  not  until  A.  D. 
311,  that  Maximin  Galerius,  who  had  been  the  author  of  the 
heaviest  calamities  on  the  christians,  published  a  solemn 
edict,  ordering  the  persecution  to  cease,  which  his  indescrib- 
able horrors  and  painful  sickness  compelled  him  to  do.  The 
next  year  Constantine,  and  his  colleague  Licinius  granted  to 
the  christians  a  full  power  of  living  according  to  their  own 
laws  and  institutions. 

For  nearly  three  hundred  years  then  the  gospel  ministry, 
founded  on  miracles,  which,  if  not  real,  were  as  easily  de- 
tected as  any  falsehood  whatever,  was  oppressed  by  cruel 
edicts  acted  upon  by  the  bitterest  enemies.  Where  was 
all  the  boasted  learning  of  this  learned  age  ?  Where  was 
all  the  sagacity  of  the  sagacious  ?  Could  not  a  priesthood, 
for  ages  improved  in  scarcely  any  thing  but  imposition  and 
fraud,  succeed  in  detecting  pretensions,  which,  if  not  real, 
were  too  grossly  absurd  to  impose  on  the  most  artless  ? 

You,  sir,  are  entirely  right  in  saying  you  cannot  prove 
this  christian  revelation  and  the  miracles  on  which  it  was 
founded,  false.  Tor  if  this  could  ever  have  been  done, 
there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that  it  would  have  been 
by  its  enemies  in  its  first  rise  ;  but  the  day  is  past  for  the 
detection  of  this  fraud,  if  it  be  one  ;  for  the  age  in  which  all 
the  means  of  detection  were  in  possession  of  its  enemies,  has 
long  since  passed  away  and  those  means  are  lost.  The  im- 
position, possessed  at  first  of  no  solidity,  might  have  been 
10 


110  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

blown  into  the  air  with  a  breath  of  common  sense,  has  mag- 
nified and  petrified  till  it  promises  to  fill  the  whole  earth, 
and  is  as  hard  as  an  adamant. 

We  hear  of  no  writer's  undertaking  to  disprove  Christian- 
ity till  about  one  hundred  years  after  the  apostles'  day,  when 
Celsus  wrote  a  violent  work  against  the  christians,  who 
were,  at  the  same  time,  suffering  severe  persecutions.  But 
this  author,  though  a  bitter  enemy  to  Christ,  allows  his  mira- 
cles ;  but  like  the  old  pharisees  imputes  them  to  a  different 
power  from  that  of  God.  Why  should  this  enemy  of  Jesus, 
his  religion,  apostles  and  followers  allow  those  miracles  ? — 
It  seems  that  there  can  be  no  good  reason  for  this  unless 
they  were  realities.  You  say,  "  that  no  miracles  or  revela- 
tions that  have  come  down  to  us  are  supported  by  so  good 
authority  as  those  recorded  in  the  New  Testament,  I  admit." 
But  how  can  you  conceive  of  any  good  evidence  of  such  mir- 
acles as  are  recorded  in  this  book  ?  We  have  no  account  of 
any  testimony  under  oath  that  they  were  realities.  And 
even  if  we  had,  could  the  solemnity  of  an  oath  be  admitted 
as  good  evidence  ?  I  think  not.  Indeed  there  was  no  au- 
thority that  would  allow  the  apostles  to  depose  in  favour  of 
the  resurrection  of  Jesus  ;  but  there  were  no  authorities 
that  could  prevent  their  bearing  a  more  convincing  testimo- 
ny. I  have  endeavoured  heretofore,  to  show  that  there  can 
be  no  good  evidence  of  such  a  fact  as  the  resurrection,  which 
is  capable  of  being  refuted  ;  and  I  will  here  add,  of  admit- 
ting reasonable  doubts  of  the  fact,  in  the  mind.  It  is  a  ques- 
tion which  properly  belongs  to  this  subject,  and  which  should 
be  often  called  up,  whether  the  evidences  of  the  resurrec- 
tion were  not  as  strong  as  they  could  have  been,  both  to  the 
disciples  and  to  those  who  believed  on  Jesus  through  their 
testimony  ;  and  furthermore,  whether  we  can  conceive  how 
the  evidences  could  have  been  stronger  on  which  we  be- 
lieve, without  perpetual  miracles,  which  not  only  seems  an 
absurdity,  but  would,  if  as  powerful  as  they  were  at  first, 
preclude  the  exercise  of  our  reasoning  faculties  and  the  ne- 
cessity of  investigation,  which  is  one  of  the  most  rational  en- 
joyments of  which  we  are  capable. 

I  grant,  if  the  vulgar  error,  that  our  eternal  salvation  de- 
pended on  our  being  correctly  acquainted  with  this  subject, 
were  true,  it  would  follow,  of  course,  that  the  least  difficulty 
in  the  way  of  our  knowing  the  whole  matter,  might  be  at- 
tended with  fatal  and  awful  consequences.  And  for  myself, 
should  1  adopt  the  popular  opinion  that  those  who  go  out  of 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  Ill 

this  world  not  understanding"  the  doctrine,  or  believing  in 
Jesus  Christ,  must  hereafter  be  forever  excluded  from  the 
blessed  immortality  which  is  brought  to  light  through  the 
gospel,  it  would  be  difficult  for  me  to  account  for  the  least 
obscurity  nameable,  and  much  more  difficult  would  it  be  to 
account  for  the  limited  circle  in  which  divine  truth  has  been 
caused  to  shine.  But  I  have  before  intimated  that  the  con- 
sequences of  our  unbelief  here,  can  with  no  more  propriety 
be  carried  into  an  eternal  state,  than  the  consequences  of 
our  ignorance  of  any  science.  It  is  derogatory  to  the-sacred 
loveliness  of  divine  truth,  either  to  promise  any  further  re- 
ward to  those  who  seek  and  find  her  than  the  enjoyment  she 
brings  to  the  soul  in  her  own  native  swef  tness,  op  to  threaten 
those  who  neglect  so  divine  a  treasure  with  any  other  incon- 
venience than  the  loss  of  such  felicity  during  their  foolish 
neglect. 

It  becomes  the  philosopher  and  perhaps  more  the  chris- 
tian to  exercise  patience,  but  patience  is  sometimes  tried  n  kh 
the  bigotry  and  nonsense  of  the  self-rigbteous,  self-wise, 
and  self-knowing,  who  profess  the  religion  of  Christ,  yet 
stand  tiptoe,  like  James  and  John,  to  call  fire  from  heaven  to 
consume  all  who  do  not  receive  their  master.  But  the  true 
spirit  of  our  religion  rebukes  such  blind  zeal  and  foolish  ar- 
rogance, by  showing  that  such  a  disposition  is  the  malady 
which  the  gospel  is  designed  to  cure.  While  the  christian 
clergy  have  spent  their  breath  and  wore  out  their  lungs  in 
anathematising  with  eternal  vengeance,  those  whom  they 
call  infidels,  have  been  worse  than  infidels,  and  brought  a 
greater  stigma  on  the  name  of  Jesus,  than  his  open  enemies 
from  Celsus  down  to  T.  Paine.  I  would  by  all  means  except 
from  the  above  remark  a  goodly  number  who  have  done 
honour  to  our  religion  by  treating  its  opposers,  as  its  spirit 
dictates,  with  candor  and  sound  argument  well  mingled  with 
divine  charity. 

Indeed  I  think  I  see  much  reason  to  look  on  what  is  called 
infidelity,  with  a  charitable  disposition  for  this  plain  reason, 
it  has  greatly  contributed  to  enlighten  the  christian  common- 
wealth, by  calling  into  action  the  very  best  of  human  abili- 
ties and  directing  them  to  search  for  the  true  grounds  on 
which  our  faith  securely  rests. 

I  hardly  know  how  I  ought  to  reply  to  what  you  say  about 
the  persecution  of  Stephen,  &c.  At  one  time  you  write  as 
if  you  would  doubt  the  authenticity  of  those  New  Testa- 
ment accounts;  then  again  you  advert  to  them  for  assistance. 


IJ2  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

But  why  should  you  go  over  such  ground,  on  which  so  much 
depends,  as  if  you  did  not  realize  that  the  subject  was  wor- 
thy of  a  pause  for  consideration? 

When  you  advert  to  the  martyrdom  of  Stephen  by  a  mob. 
(which  by  the  way  was  the  council.)  You  take  no  notice  of 
the  cause  of  his  being  arrested,  accused  or  condemned. 

Let  reason  and  candor  look  at  the  account.  "  And  Ste- 
phen full  of  faith  and  power,  did  great  wonders  and  miracle* 
among  the  people.  Then  there  arose  certain  of  the  syna- 
gogue, which  is  called  the  synagogue  of  the  libertines,  and 
Cyreniaos,  and  Alexanderians,  and  of  them  of  Celicia  and  of 
Asia,  disputing  with  Stephen.  And  they  were  not  able  to 
resist,  &.c.  Then  they  suborned  men,  which  said,  we  have 
heard  him  speak  blasphemous  words  against  Moses,  and 
against  God.  And  they  stirred  up  the  people,  and  the  elders, 
and  the  scribes,  and  come  upon  him,  and  caught  him,  and 
brought  him  to  the  council,  and  set  up  false  witnesses,  which 
-aid,  this  man  ceaseth  not  to  speak  blasphemous  words 
gainst  this  holy  place,  and  the  law :  for  we  have  heard  him 
.-say,  that  this  Jesus  of  Nazareth  shall  destroy  this  place,  and 
change  the  customs  which  Moses  delivered  us.  And  all  that 
sat  in  the  council,  looking  stedfastly  on  him,  saw  his  face  as 
it  had  been  the  face  of  an  angel.  Then  said  the  high  priest, 
are  these  things  so  ?  Here  follows  that  admirable  speech 
of  Stephen  before  the  grand  council  of  his  nation,  which  de- 
nes all  conjecture  of  forgery,  and  enraged  his  enemies 
against  him.  And  they  stoned  him  for  pretended  blasphemy. 
The  concluding  clause  of  this  speech  is  particularly  worthy 
of  notice.  *'  Which  ©f  the  prophets  have  not  your  fathers 
persecuted  ?  And  they  have  slain  them  which  shewed  be- 
fore of  the  coming  of  the  just  one;  of  whom  ye  have  been 
now  the  betrayers  and  murderers;  who  have  received  the 
law  by  the  disposition  of  angels,  and  have  not  kept  it."  Now, 
sir,  is  there  any  more  evidence  for  believing  that  there  was 
such  a  man  as  Stephen  stoned  according  to  the  above  ac- 
count, than  for  believing  that  he  was  stoned  by  the  authority 
of  the  council,  and  for  what  is  here  set  forth  ? 

This  council  which  put  Stephen  to  death,  was  the  same 
before  which  Peter  was  arraigned  on  account  of  the  miracle 
wrought  on  the  impotent  man ;  which  according  to  Dr.  Ham- 
mond was  the  Sanhedrim. 

But  you  seem  much  engaged  to  prove  that  martyrdom 
does  not  prove  the  truth  of  a  belief  for  which  the  martyr  dies. 
Here  you  have,  not  been  careful  to  distinguish  cases.     A  Pa- 


. 


SKftlES    OF    LETTERS.  113 

pist,  who  has  been  brought  up  to  believe  in  the  divine  pre- 
sence, might  perhaps,  suffer  death  rather  than  renounce  it ; 
and  yet  we  should  not  consider  this  sufficient  to  prove  the 
doctrine  of  transubtantiation  ;  but  no  candid  person  would 
doubt  the  sincerity  of  the  martyr.  But  why  should  we  hesi- 
tate to  believe  the  doctrine  for  which  he  suffered  ?  Answer, 
the  doctrine  is  not  a  subject  of  which  he  could  have  positive 
knowledge.  He  could  not  be  eye  nor  ear  witness  of  the 
fact.  But  the  testimony  for  which  the  disciples  of  Jesus  suf- 
fered, was  a  testimony  concerning  a  matter  of  fact,  of  which 
their  eyes  and  ears  could  take  proper  cognizance  ;  and  if 
their  sufferings  are  allowed  to  prove  their  sincerity,  then  it 
is  granted  that  they  believed  in  the  resurrection  of  Jesus. 
If  the  entire  unbelief  of  the  disciples  in  the  resurrection 
could  be  overcome,  and  they  brought  to  believe  that  they 
saw  Jesus  and  talked  with  him,  and  ate  with  him,  and  were 
frequently  in  his  company  after  his  resurrection,  for  forty 
days;  and  if  they  were  willing  to  suffer  persecution  and 
death  rather  than  desist  from  troubling  the  people  with  this 
testimony,  it  appears  to  me  that  reason  will  allow  that  this 
is,  at  least,  some  evidence  of  the  truth  of  this  astonishing 
fact ;  though  this  was  not  the  evidence  which  carried  con- 
viction to  so  many  thousands  of  the  Jews  as  well  as  of  the 
Gentiles.  This  we  have  before  shown  was  the  manifesta- 
tion of  the  mighty  power  of  God  in  the  miraculous  wonders 
which  God  wrought  by  the  apostles. 

You  speak  of  the  honour,  which  was  no  doubt  attached  to 
the  martyrdom  of  Stephen,  as  being  an  inducement  to  others 
to  submit  to  this  example,  &x.  You  hereby  allow  that  the 
testimony  for  which  he  suffered  was  surely  believed,  other- 
wise no  honour  could  attach  to  those  who  suffered  for  it. 
Why  then  do  you  not  attempt  to  show  the  probable  ground 
on  which  this  testimony  was  erroneously  believed? 

1  humbly  conceive  that  your  observations  which  regard 
the  uprightness  of  the  apostles  are  too  indefinate.  You  say, 
M  This  much,  however,  I  believe,  and  of  this  much  I  have  no 
doubt,  that  Paul  and  the  other  apostles  were  convinced  of 
the  truth  and  the  salutary  effects  of  the  moral  precepts 
which  had  been  taught  and  preached  by  Christ ;  and  they 
were  willing  to  preach  and  enforce  them  by  all  the  means 
in  their  power,  even  at  the  risque  of  thsir  lives,"  &c.  And 
this  you  think,  u  constituted  them  wise  and  good  men.' 
Here,  sir,  do  you  not  leave  room  for  the  notion  that  tiic 
apostles  would  enforce  their  moral  doctrine  with  the  testi- 
10* 


114  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

raony  of  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  and  their  pretensions  to 
miraculous  powers,  when  they  had  no  belief  in  the  former", 
and  knew  the  latter  to  be  an  imposition  ?  If  these  men  en- 
deavoured to  enforce  any  principles  by  practicing  such  im- 
positions, however  pure  those  principles  were,  these  men 
were  vile  impostors,  and  merited  all  their  sufferings.  I  sol- 
emnly protest  against  the  wisdom  or  goodness  of  any  man 
who  is  an  impostor. 

I  proceed  to  notice  your  third  proposition,  which  is  as  fol- 
lows : 

"  3.  The  facts  on  which  revelation  is  predicated  are  un- 
like everv  thing  of  which  we  have  any  positive  knowledge." 
"  Of  the  truth  of  thii  proposition,"  you  say  I  "  must  be  sen- 
sible." You  must  indulge  me,  sir,  in  saying  that  you  have 
made  a  mistake.  I  am  insensible  of  the  correctness  of  your 
statement.  The  facts  on  which  the  christian  faith  is  predi- 
cated, are  of  that  description  which  come  within  the  obser- 
vation of  the  outward  senses  of  men. 

I  know  of  no  fact  on  whieh  Jesus  called  the  people  to  rest 
their  faith,  that  they  could  not  as  easily  judge  of,  through 
the  medium  of  their  senses  as  of  any  facts  in  nature.  See 
John  v.  36,  "  But  I  have  greater  witness  than  that  of  John  : 
for  the  works  which  the  Father  hath  given  me  to  finish,  the 
same  works  that  1  do  bear  witness  of  me,  that  the  Father 
hath  sent  me."  10th,  24th,  25th,  "  Then  came  the  Jews 
round  about  him,  and  said  unto  him,  how  long  doest  thou 
make  us  to  doubt  ?  If  thou  be  the  Christ  tell  us  plainly. 
Jesus  answered  them>  I  told  you,  and  ye  believed  not:  the 
works  that  I  do  in  my  Father's  name,  they  bear  witness  of 
me."  37th,  38th,  "  If  I  do  not  the  works  of  my  Father,  be- 
lieve me  not.  But  if  I  do,  though  ye  believe  not  me,  be- 
lieve the  works ;  that  ye  may  know  and  believe  that  the 
Father  is  in  me  and  I  in  him." 

All  the  works  of  which  Jesus  spake,  were  such  as  the 
people  could  know  and  examine  by  seeing  and  hearing,  and 
concerning  which  there  was  no  necessity  of  there  being  ig- 
norant or  imposed  upon.  See  the  account  of  John's  sending 
two  of  his  disciples  to  ask  Jesus  if  he  were  the  Christ.  Luke 
vii.  20,  &c.  "  When  the  men  were  come  unto  him,  they 
said,  John  Baptist  hath  sent  us  unto  thee,  saying,  art  thou  he 
that  should  come?  or  look  we  for  another?  And  in  that 
same  hour  he  cured  many  of  their  infirmities  aad  plagues, 
and  of  evil  spirits  ;  and  unto  many  that  were  blind  he  gave 
sight.     Then  Jesus,  answering,  said  unto  them,  go  your  way, 


SERIES   OF    LETTERS.  11 J 

and  tell  John  what  things  ye  have  seen  and  heard  ;  how  that 
the  blind  see,  the  lame  walk,  the  lepers  are  cleansed,  the 
deaf  hear,  the  dead  are  raised,  to  the  poor  the  gospel  is 
preached."  Of  such  facts  the  people  were  capable  of  judg- 
ing, and  on  such  facts  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus  rested.  And 
furthermore,  it  was  on  such  facts  that  the  testimony  of  the 
apostles  concerning  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  rested.  Now 
it  is  evident  that  those  facts  on  which  divine  revelation  is 
predicated,  are  like  facts  of  which  we  have  positive  knowl- 
edge, in  all  respects  as  it  regards  the  case  of  knowing  them. 
It  was  just  as  easy  for  people  to  know  those  things,  as  it  is 
for  us  to  know  the  things  which  are  familiar  to  our  senses. 

If  you  mean  by  the  above  proposition,  simply  that  mira- 
cles are  not  wrought  before  our  eyes,  it  is  granted  ;  but 
have  you  shown  that  a  continuance  of  miracles  would  more 
rationally  vindicate  the  gospel,  than  the  divine  economy  has 
done  by  preserving  the  variety  of  evidence  which  is  now  at 
our  command?  If  this  cannot  be  done,  then  the  discontinu- 
ance of  miracles  is  no  reason  why  we  should  doubt  the  truth 
of  this  revelation.  How  then  is  your  third  proposition,  even 
in  any  sense  in  which  it  can  be  true,  to  be  understood  un- 
favourable to  divine  revelation  ? 

It  may  not  be  improper  to  notice  some  reasons  why  the 
continuance  of  the  miracles,  on  which  the  gospel  was  first 
propagated,  would  not  comport  with  the   divine   economy. 

1st.  As  has  been  before  suggested,  it  would,  if  combined 
with  the  force  it  first  had,  preclude  the  exercise  of  the  men- 
tal powers  of  investigation. 

2d.  This  power  of  working  miracles  must  have  been  dis- 
tributed to  various  sects  and  heresies,  or  by  being  confined 
to  one  order,  prevent  the  existence  of  any  other,  which 
would  be  another  preventive  of  immense  reasoning,  and  tend 
to  circumscribe  the  sphere  in  which  the  human  mind  is  ca- 
pacitated to  move. 

3d.  The  continuance  of  those  miracles  must  have  chang 
ed  the  order  of  nature,  and  continued  men  on  earth  forever, 
or  from-  generation  to  generation  ;  for  if  this  power  had 
been  exercised  on  some  and  not  to  the  advantage  of  others, 
it  would  look  like  the  partial  systems  of  men,  and  in  room 
of  commending  the  impartial  goodness  of  God,  would  have 
refuted  it.     But, 

The  manifestation  of  this  divine  power, .in  those  miracles 
on  which  our  religion  is  founded,  while  it  is  attended  with 
none  of  the  evils  which  a  continuasce  would  evidently  pro- 


116  SERIES   OF   LETTERS. 

dace,  besides  forming  an  immoveable  rock  on  which  so  glori- 
ous a  superstructure  is  safely  founded,  furnishes  an  immense 
subject  for  the  power  of  ratiocination. 

You  will  excuse  me  for  not  noticing  particularly  all  you 
say  about  modern  pretensions  to  revelations  and  miracles, 
as  I  think  it  would  occupy  time  that  may  be  better  employ- 
ed. But  I  will  observe  on  your  opinion,  that  it  is  remarka- 
ble, that  Saul  when  he  was  converted,  did  not  go  to  Jerusa- 
lem to  inquire  more  fully  into  the  circumstances  of  the  res- 
urrection, that  if  he  had  done  this,  you  would  not  have  hesi- 
tated to  make  use  of  it  against  his  declaration  recorded  in 
Gal.  i.  11,  12.  u  But  I  certify  you,  brethren,  that  the  gospel 
which  was  preached  of  me  is  not  after  man.  Fori  neither 
received  it  of  man,  neither  was  I  taught  it,  but  by  the  reve- 
lation of  Jesus  Christ." 

Why  do  you  mention  that  we  have  not  a  particular  ac- 
count of  St.  Paul's  conversion  written  by  his  own  hand  ?  Do 
you-  think  that  what  a  man  writes  of  himself  is  more  to  be' 
depended  on,  than  what  his  biographer  writes  of  him  ?  Your 
suggestions  on  this  subject  seem  to  indicate,  at  least,  some 
scruples  respecting  this  conversion,  but  not  in  a  way  to  show 
where  the  ground  of  scruples  lies.  What  is  there  for  me  to 
answer  ?  Why  do  you  treat  this  subject  with  such  neglect? 
In  a  former  communication,  I  requested  your  attention  to  it 
in  a  special  manner,  with  a  view  to  confine  our  reasoning  to 
our  subject,  and  to  avoid  rambling  from  one  thing  to  another 
without  making  ourselves  acquainted  with  any  thing.  In 
your  reply  you  never  attempted  to  give  any  account  why 
Saul  should  embrace  the  religion  he  had  persecuted  ;  37ou 
made  no  attempt  to  give  any  reason  why  he  preached  Jesus 
and  the  resurrection  ;  nor  did  you  assign  any  reason  why  he 
should  be  willing  to  suffer  the  loss  of  all  earthly  enjoyments 
and  endure  persecutions  for  Christ's  sake  ;  nor  did  you  at- 
tempt to  prove  that  there  never  was  such  a  man  and  such  a 
conversion.  The  subject  you  considered  still  before  you, 
and  in  this  seventh  number  you  have  spoken  of  it  again,  but 
have  paid  no  particular  attention  to  it. 

What  you  say  on  the  subject  of  prophecy,  does  not  appear 
to  me,  either  to  reflect  any  light  on  it,  or  to  call  up  any 
question  of  importance.  Your  query  whether  the  books  of 
the  New  Testnrnent  were  not  written  after  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem,  which  would  suppose  that  the  prophecy  of  the 
destruction  of  that  city  was  written  after  the  events  took 
place  of  which  the  prophecy  speaks,  is  an  old  suggestion  m 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  J  17 

whick  I  aai  unable  to  see  any  thing  very  reasonable.  And 
1  will  remark  here,  that  men  who  seem  to  lay  an  uncommon 
claim  to  reason,  ought  to  make  use  of  it  when  arguing  on 
such  momentous  subjects.  What  difference  would  it  make 
whether  St.  Matthew  wrote  his  gospel  before,  or  after  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem,  as  it  respects  the  prophecy  which 
Jesus  delivered  concerning  it?  You  allow  St.  Matthew  to 
be  an  honest  man.  You  do  not  doubt  then  but  Jesus  did  de- 
liver such  a  prophecy  before  his  death,  which  was  certainly 
before  the  destruction  of  the  city.  Then  surely  it  makes 
no  difference  whether  the  prophecy  was  committed  to  pa- 
per before,  or  after  the  fulfilment  of  it.  Besides,  you  seem 
to  urge  the  silence  of  St.  John  on  the  subject  as  unfavoura- 
ble to  the  account,  because  he  wrote  his  gospel  after  Jeru- 
salem was  destroyed.  As  to  interpolations  which  you  think 
might  have  found  their  way  into  the  gospels,  it  appears  to 
me,  sir,  that  a  candid  consideration  of  this  subject  would  is- 
sue in  this  conclusion  ;  if  any  important  interpolations  had 
been  admitted,  they  would  have  produced  such  a  disagree- 
ment as  to  effectually  destroy  the  validity  of  the  hooks ;  for 
if  one  heresy  could  be  indulged,  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose 
that  another  would  be,  and  so  on,  which  in  room  of  allowing 
us  the  scriptures  in  their  present  consistent  form,  would  eith- 
er have  destroyed  their  existence  altogether,  or  have  varied 
so  as  to  confound  their  ideas. 

For  a  candid,  learned,  and  impartial  view  of  the  scriptures 
of  the  Nevv  Testament,  I  refer  you  to  Paley's  evidences, 
and  in  particular  to  his  eleven  propositions,  which  he  has 
proved  in  a  manner  satisfactory,  as  I  conceive  to  the  candid 
inquirer. 

These  propositions  begin  on  page  103,  and  are  the  fol- 
lowing. 

1.  "That  the  historical  books  of  the  New  Testament, 
meaning  thereby  the  four  gospels,  and  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  are  quoted,  or  alluded  to,  by  a  series  of  christian 
writers,  beginning  with  those  who  were  contemporary  with 
the  apostfes,  or  who  immediately  followed  them,  and  pro- 
ceeding in  close  and  regular  succession  from  their  time  to 
the  present. 

2.  That  when  they  are  quoted,  or  alluded  to,  they  are 
quoted  or  alluded  to  with  peculiar  respect,  as  books  sui  ge- 
ueus,  as  possessing  an  authority  which  belonged  to  no  other 
books,  and  as  conclusive  in  all  questions  and  controversies 
among  christians. 


118  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

3.  That  they  were  in  very  early  times  collected  into  a 
distinct  volume. 

4.  That  they  were  distinguished  by  appropriate  names 
and  titles  of  respect. 

5.  That  they  were  publicly  read  and  expounded  in  the 
religious  assemblies  of  the  christians 

6.  That  commentaries  were  written  upon  them,  harmo- 
nies formed  out  of  them,  different  copies  carefully  collected, 
and  versions  of  them  made  into  different  languages. 

7.  That  they  were  received  by  christians  of  different 
sects,  by  many  heretics  as  well  as  catholics,  and  usually  ap- 
pealed to  by  both  sides  in  the  controversies  which  arose  in 
those  days. 

8.  That  the  four  Gospels,  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  thir- 
teen epistles  of  St.  Paul,  the  first  epistle  of  John,  and  the 
first  of  Peter,  were  received  without  doubt,  by  those  who 
doubted  concerning  the  other  books  which  are  inclosed  in 
our  present  canon. 

9.  That  the  gospels  were  attacked  by  the  early  adversa- 
ries of  Christianity,  as  books  containing  the  accounts  upon 
which  the  religion  was  founded. 

10.  That  formal  catalogues  of  authentic  scriptures  were 
published;  in  all  which  our  present  sacred  histories  were 
recorded. 

11.  That  these  propositions  cannot  be  affirmed  of  any 
other  books,  claiming  to  be  books  of  scripture  ;  by  which  I 
mean  those  books  which  are  commonly  called  Apochry- 
pbal." 

The  first  evidence  adduced  by  this  celebrated  author  t© 
prove  his  first  proposition,  proves  that  the  gospel  of  St. 
Matthew,  which  contains  a  very  particular  account  of  the 
prophecy  of  Jesus  concerning  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem, 
was  written  before  the  event  took  place.  This  evidence  is 
a  quotation  from  the  epistle  of  Barnabas,  St.  Paul's  com- 
panion, in  the  following  words  :  "  Let  us  therefore,  beware 
lest  it  come  upon  us,  as  it  is  zvritten,  there  are  many  called, 
few  chosen."  St.  Matthew's  gospel  is  the  only  book  in 
which  these  words  are  found  ;  and  you  will  perceive  by  the 
expression,  u  as  it  is  written,"  that  Barnabas  quoted  the  pas- 
sage from  an  author  of  authority.  Barnabas  wrote  his  epis- 
tle during  the  troubles  which  ended  in  the  destruction  of 
the  Jews  and  their  city.  This  epistle  of  Barnabas  is  quoted 
by  Clement  of  Alexandria,  A.  D.  1 94 :  by  Origen,  A.  D.  230. 


SERIES   OF    LETTERS.  ]19 

It  is  mentioned  by  Eusebius,  A.  D.  315,  and  by  Jerome, 
A.JD.  392.* 

Your  insinuations  that  the  origin  of  the  christian  scriptures 
is  involved  in  fable  and  mystery,  should  have  been  accom- 
panied with  a  clear  refutation  of  the  arguments  used  by 
Lardner,  Paley,  and  others,  who  have  with  much  learning 
and  labour  traced  the  stream  to  its  fountain. 

I  must  say  something  on  the  subject  which  you  introduce 
concerning  man,  as  a  species  of  being,  or  you  may  think  me 
inexcusable  for  the  neglect.  There  seem  to  be  two  main 
questions  suggested  on  this  subject;  the  rirst  inquires  what 
man  was  farther  back  than  history  reaches  ;  and  the  other 
directs  the  mind  to  a  "  line  of  demarcation''  between  the 
human  and  the  brute. 

We  have  no  account  that  I  know  of  when  the  use  of  fire 
was  not  known.  We  read  Gen.  iv.  22,  That  Tubal-cain  was 
an  instructor  of  every  artificer  in  brass  and  iron,  and  if  rea- 
son has  any  thing  to  do  in  this  case,  we  may  suppose  that  the 
use  of  fire  was  known  to  these  mechanics.  The  date  to  which 
this  reading  belongs,  is  3875  years  before  Christ:  but  there 
can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  but  that  the  use  of  fire  was 
known  long  before,  and  that  it  was  used  in  the  offerings 
which  were  made  by  Cain  and  Abel. 

That  the  discovery  of  arts  and  the  progress  of  science 
have  changed  man  from  what  he  originally  was,  is  no  more 
reasonable,  than  to  suppose  that  the  education  which  a  child 
acquires  by  degrees,  by  the  same  degrees  changes  him  in 
respect  to  his  nature.  That  the  arts  and  sciences  serve  to 
improve  and  extend  the  human  intellects  is  reasonable 
enough,  but  that  they  add  any  thing  to  the  natural  princi 
pies  or  faculties  of  man  is  not  conceivable. 

In  fixing  the  u  line  of  demarcation"  between  the  human 
nature,  and  the  brutal,  I  will  suggest  two  characteristics 
which  you  have  noticed  by  which  the  distinction  may  be  as- 
certained. 

The  first  is  the  power  or  faculty  of  improving  from 
generation  to  generation  his  condition  by  means  of  art, 
and  knowing  how  to  advance  from  one  degree  of  science  to 
another.  This  I  will  suppose  belongs  to  man  and  is  peculiar 
to  our  race  of  being.  We  know  of  no  other  animal  on  earth 
that  has  ever  improved  his  condition  by  the  discovery  of  the 
arts  or  an  increase  of  science. 

*  PaJey's  evidences,  p.  lOti. 


120  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

The  other  characteristic  is  one  of  your  propositions,  on 
which  you  build  your  system  of  doubting,  viz.  Superstition. 
This  is  found  in  no  creature  but  such  as  is  susceptible  of 
religion.  Man  is  the  only  religious  animal,  if  I  may  be  al- 
lowed this  form  of  expression,  found  on  the  earth. 

The  progress  which  man  has  made  in  arts  and  sciences, 
and  the  progress  he  has  made  in  divine  or  religious  knowl- 
edge distinguish  him  from  the  brutal  creation.  As  in  the 
former  he  h  is  run  into  thousands  of  errors,  so  in  the  latter 
he  has  wandered  in  darkness,  with  now  and  then  a  blessed 
ray  of  light  which  improved  his  mind.  When  the  knowl- 
edge of  the  arts  became  generally  defused  by  means  of  the 
extension  of  the  Roman  government,  it  pleased  our  blessed 
Creator  to  cause  the  sun  of  divine  light  to  rise  on  the  Jew 
and  Gentiie  world.  And  gave  him  a  covenant  of  the  peo- 
ple, a  light  to  lighten  the  Gentiles,  and  the  glory  of  his  peo- 
ple Israel. 

Your  opinion  that  men  are  seldom  made  unhappy  in  con- 
sequence of  doubting  a  future  existence,  may  be  true  in  a 
♦comparative  sense,  for  I  believe  there  are  few  in  compari- 
son with  the  whole,  who  do  doubt  on  this  subject.  Gener- 
ally speaking,  it  is  the  few^  who  like  the  philosopher  that 
rendered  himself  blind  by  endeavouring  to  find  out  what  the 
sun  was  composed  of,  thought  there  was  no  sun  nor  any 
light,  that  so  far  give  up  a  hope  of  futurity  as  to  be  misera- 
ble in  their  belief. 

That  the  idea  of  endless  torment,  such  as  our  clergy  have 
represented,  and  with  which  they  have  most  horribly  terri- 
fied thousands  and  driven  them  into  black  despair,  is  more 
horrible  than  no  existence  at  all  will  be  allowed  by  every 
candid  mind.  But  in  contemplating  an  infinite  source  of  di- 
vine benevolence,  and  his  means  of  giving  and  perpetuating 
existence,  and  of  rendering  existence  a  blessing,  the  mind  is 
not  driven  to  the  necessity  of  selecting  between  these  two 
evils.  No,  sir,  the  mind  thus  employed  has  sweeter  themes 
and  brighter  prospects — in  belief  of  that  invaluable  treasure, 
that  divine  testimony  of  the  inspired  apostle  :  "  As  in  Adam 
all  die,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive;"  which 
sentence  you  nor  I  ever  heard  a  preacher  of  endless  pun- 
ishment recite  in  a  sermon  in  our  lives,  the  soul  rises  by 
faith  into  sublime  regions  of  future  peace  and  everlasting 
enjoyment,  when  death  shall  be  swallowed  up  of  life. 

I  need  not  tell  you,  my  brother,  that  it  ha?,  been  through 
many  trials,  afflictions,  doubts,  and  temptations,   that  your 


m 

csca 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  J2J 

feeble  humble  servant  has  found  the  way  to  this  rock  ;  you 
cannot  be  altogether  ignorant  of  this  Iravail  of  mind.  Per- 
it  me  then  to  call  to  remembrance  the  bondage  we  have 
jcaped,  the  sea  through  which  we  have  passed,  the  sweet 
ongs  of  deliverance  and  salvation  which  we  have  chanted 
to  our  Redeemer  in  the  faith  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus 
Christ.  And  here  permit  me  to  request  }rour  assistance  in 
giving  me  support,  and  in  strengthening  my  hands  in  the 
work  of  the  Lord. 

Yours,  &c.  H.  BALLOU. 


EXTRACTS  No.  Till. 

"  In  regard  to  the  story  reported  among  the  Jews,  respect- 
ing the  body  of  Jesus,  I  admit  there  is  a  greater  probability 
of  there  being  such  a  report,  especially  if  the  body  could 
not  be  found,  and  the  apostles  affirmed  that  he  was  risen 
from  the  dead,  than  there  is  that  the  resurrection,  should  be 
actually  true  :  hence,  perhaps,  I  was  not  so  much  on  my 
guard  in  the  expression  as  I  ought  to  have  been.  What  I 
particularly  had  in  my  mind  was,  that  I  might  find  it  difficult 
to  prove  even  the  existence  of  such  a  story  ;  i.  e.  in  the  days 
of  the  apostles  ;  and  still  more  difficult  to  prove,  even  on  the 
ground  that  there  was  no  resurrection,  that  this  story  was 
true  ;  and  therefore  there  could  be  no  use  in  urging  the  truth 
of  this  story  in  order  to  invalidate  the  truth  of  the  resurrec- 
tion. I  do  not  conceive,  however,  that  because  I  doubt  the 
fact,  I  am  under  obligations  to  account  for  the  fallacy.  It 
always  belongs  to  the  advocates  of  the  truth  of  any  story,  to 
bring  forward  sufficient  evidence  to  prove  the  same.  I  can 
think  of  a  solution,  however,  that  would  appear  to  my  un- 
derstanding much  more  probable,  than  to  suppose,  as  men- 
tioned in  your  seventh  article,the  c  account  written  longsince 
the  apostles'  day  ;'  yet  it  may,  perhaps,  be  attended  with 
equal  or  greater  difficulties,  viz.  That  the  body  was  not 
stolen  by  the  apostles,but  was  taken  away  by  other  persons, 
who  were  willing  that  Jesus  should  the" deified ;  according 
to  the  then  common  acceptation  of  that  word  among  the 
Greeks  ;  and  who  studied  this  stratagem  with  an  express  de- 
sign to  deceive  the  Jews,  as  a  punishment  to  them  for  so 
cruelly  putting  him  to  death,  and  also  to  deceive  his  disci- 
ples, in  order  to  inhance  the  honour  of  {he  name  of  Jesu«. 
11 


122  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

This  might  have  been  done,  as  I  conceive,  by  persons  who 
never  became  his  open  followers,  so  far  as  to  suffer  death 
on  his  account,  but  were  contented  in  having  gained  their 
object;  to  do  which,  it  was  only  necessary  in  the  first  in- 
stance to  frighten  the  soldiers.  It  may  be  difficult  after  all, 
as  I  have  observed  concerning  the  human  species,  to  say 
where  the  truth  of  the  account  ends,  or  where  the  fallacy 
begins  ;  but  that  some  such  thing  should  have  taken  place 
is  more  probable  to  my  understanding  than  that  the  literal 
resurrection  of  Jesus  should  have  been  true.  But  I  perceive 
that  my  expression,  concerning  the  report  among  the  Jews, 
was  a  little  too  strong ;  and  carried  rather  more  in  it  than 
what  I  was  aware.  For  even  on  my  hypothesis,  as  well  as 
on  every  other  which  admits  the  absence  of  the  body,  such 
a  report  would  appear  very  probable. 

"  It  must  be  granted,  as  you  have  suggested,  that  there 
was  such  a  report  among  the  Jews  at  the  time  when  that 
record  was  made,  or  else  that  record  would  not  appear  at 
all  to  '  advantage1  in  support  of  the  truth  of  Christianity. 

"  That  '  reason  is  candid,'  I  also  admit ;  and  if  I  am  blun- 
dering in  making  mistakes,  1  believe  you  will  have  the  good- 
ness to  acknowledge  that  I  am  candid  in  retracting  them 
again  when  they  are  so  pointed  out  to  me  that  I  can  see 
them. 

"  Respecting  divine  revelation,  it  is  true,  I  understood 
you  to  mean  something  more  than  barely  what  is  predicated 
on  the  resurrection  df  Jesus;  yet  in  the  second  proposition 
of  the  three  which  you  made,  viz.  4  Is  the  resurrection  of 
Jesus  capable  of  being  proved  ;'  I  understand  you  to  state 
one  single  fact,  on  which  you  are  willing  to  rest  the  final 
issue  of  the  argument.  This  being  the  most  important  fact, 
relative  to  the  truth  of  Christianity,  and  which,  probably,  is 
as  difficult  of  proof  as  any,  I  do  not  perceive  any  disingen- 
uousness  in  confining  you  now  to  this  proposition  till  it  is 
either  proved  or  admitted.  Neither  do  I  perceive  how 
this  can  embarrass  j'our  argument,  as  \ou  have  proposed  to 
consider  them  c  true,  disjunctively  ;'  as  well  as  conjunctively. 
When  therefore  you  have  proved  the  three  propositions  dis- 
junctively ;  particularly  the  second,  above  named,  then  I 
shall  be  willing  you  should  avail  yourself  of  their  union. — 
You  may  say,  perhaps,  I  have  proposed  to  admit  the  truth 
of  your  three  propositions ;  but  you  will  also  perceive,  it 
was  only  for  the  sake  of  introducing  a  fourth  proposition, 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  123 

which  it  will  not  be  necessary  for  you  to  consider  until  the 
three  first  are  proved  true. 

"  I  conceive  that  reason  has  no  more  to  do  in  this  case 
than  to  judge  of  the  evidences  of  facts  ;  and  then,  if  the  facts 
are  supported,  reason  can  judge  of  their  relation  one  to  the 
other;  but  to  assume,  in  the  first  place,  the  truth  of  revela- 
tion, and  then  infer  from  that  the  probability  of  the  truth  of 
the  resurrection  of  Jesus,  appears  tome  to  be  unreasonable. 
Therefore,  if  you  attempt  to  prove  the  truth  of  revelation, 
I  conceive  you  must  in  the  first  place  prove,  '  disjunctively,' 
the  truth  of  the  resurrection.  If,  therefore,  you  have  con- 
sidered yourself  excused  from  proving  the  facts  on  which 
the  truth  of  revelation  seems  to  rest,  because  I  have  granted 
them  for  the  sake  of  the  argument,  you  have  misapprehend- 
ed my  meaning.  1  grant  nothing,  respecting  the  main  ques- 
tion, until  it  is  proved. 

"  Notwithstanding  what  you  have  said  about  *  the  known 
facts,'  and  c  facts  which  you  grant,  for  the  sake  of  the  argu- 
ment,' &c.  you  will  perceive  by  my  seventh  number,  that  I 
do  not  consider  the  l  miracles  of  Jesus,  his  resurrection,  and 
the  miracles  wrought  by  the  apostles,'  either  granted  or 
proved  ;  i.  e.  in  relation  to  the  main  question ;  and  hence, 
whatever  weight  your  argument  may  have,  when  you  have 
succeeded  in  that  (if  you  should  succeed  at  all)  at  present 
they  seem  to  be  hardly  conclusive.  I  know  it  would  save 
you  much  time,  if  you  could  draw  from  me  an  acknowledge- 
ment of  the  truth  of  the  facts  en  which  you  rely;  and  you 
seem  to  argue,  if  I  understand  you,  as  though  that  was  al- 
ready the  case  ;  but  whatever  you  may  have  understood,  I 
must  distinctly  disavow  any  such  acknowledgement ;  and  I 
shall  still  expect  (unless  it  is  done  in  answer  to  my  seventh 
number)  when  you  come  to  reply  to  this,  that  you  will  state 
distinctly,  and  together,  the  evidences  and  arguments  on 
which  you  mostly  rely. 

"  If,  however,  you  have  meant  nothing  more  by  all  this 
than  to  point  out  the  use  you  shall  make  of  the  miracles,  &c. 
(which  have  been  granted  for  the  sake  of  the  argument) 
when  those  miracles,  &c.  shall  have  been  either  proven,  or 
else  acknowledged  true,  in  relation  to  the  main  question, 
then  1  have  no  fault  to  find  ;  but  otherwise,  your  argument 
in  this  place  seems  to  be  a  little  premature. 

"  You  say, '  the  known  facts,  such  as  the  miracles,  &,c.  I 
used  as  proof  of  the  divine  mission  of  the  servants  of  God. 
This. divine  mission  being  proved  gives  the  ground  on  which 


124  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

I  contend  for  the  merit  of  their  testimony,  concerning  a  fu- 
ture state.1 

u  Here  you  will  perceive,  sir,  that,  according"  to  your  own 
statement,  to  prove  this  divine  mission,  you  must  first  prove 
the  certainty  of  those  miracles,  &c.  on  which  the  truth  of 
the  divine  mission  is  predicated.  And  these  are  things, 
about  the  truth  of  which,  as  I  indicated  all  along,  there  may 
be  serious  doubts. 

M  I  am  at  a  loss  also  to  understand,  what  you  mean  by  a 
'  divine  mission.'  You  inform  me  that  I  misapprehended 
you  i  in  supposing  that1  you  '  mean  to  contend,  that  what 
the  npo*tles  have  said  respecting  a  future  state,  was  spoken 
by  way  of  conclusions  from  certain  known  facts.1  Here,  I 
must  confers,  I  am  really  at  a  loss  to  understand  you  :  how 
that  either  Jesus,  or  his  apostles,  could  understand  a  divine 
mission,  even  if  they  hud  received  one, unless  it  were  by  con- 
clusions from  certain  knowi  facts  ;  that  is, facts  well  known  to 
rhem,  I  cannot  conceive  ;  and  therefore  must  have  some  fur- 
ther explanation  on  this  subject  before  lean  fully  answer  you. 
V  >r  1  must  be  better  informed,  than  I  am  at  present,  what 
you  mean  by  a  divine  mission,  before  I  can  see  the  necessity 
:  f  '-denying  the  reality  of  those  miracles — or  of  granting 
the  authority  of  their  (Christ  and  his  apostles)  testimony;' 
i hat  is,  in  regard  to  a  future  state.  But  even  if  I  should  be 
made  to  see  this,  it  would  be  of  no  use  for  the  present ;  be- 
cause as  it  respects  the  final  issue  of  the  argument,  I  have 
not,  neither  do  I  now  admit  the  reality  of  those  miracles: 
as  you  must  have  seen  by  my  seventh  number. 

uThe  next  particular  which  demands  notice  is  the  quot- 
ed passage  which  I  pronounced  Most  excellent ! 

M  Here  a  serious  query  suggests  itself  to  my  mind.  I  ask 
myself;  am  I,  or  am  I  not,  as  capable  of  writing  my  senti- 
ments, so  as  to  be  understood  by  a  rational  man,  a9  those 
plaiDS  illiterate  men  who  wrote  the  gospels  ?  And  yet  if  my 
words  are  so  wrested  by  logical  tzvisticisms  (if  1  may  be  allow- 
ed to  use  that  expression)  so  as  to  mean  what  never  entered 
my  heart,  and  all  this  with  apparent  serious  candor  too, 
what  may  have  been  the  fate  of  the  writings  of  the  evangel- 
ists ?  Now  this  is  something  in  which  I  cannot  be  deceiv- 
ed ;  i.  e.  as  it  respects  myself;  for  any  man  of  common 
sense  does  know  his  own  meaning,  whether  his  words  fully 
express  his  meaning  or  not, or  whether  they  may  be  made  to 
mean  something  else  or  flot. 


SERfES    OP    LETTERS.  J  25 

Cl  Permit  me  therefore  once  more  to  explain.  The  ex- 
pression, Most  excellent!  was  not  so  much  intended  to  have 
been  applied  to  the  sentence  proceding  it,  as  to  the  auth- 
or of  that  sentence,  whose  goodness,  in  stating  so  explicitly 
what  he  understands  by  the  christian  faith,  I  commended. 
And  you  must  excuse  me  for  not  being  able  to  see  any  in- 
consistency, absurdity,  or  contradiction  in  my  words  which 
follow  that  expression.  Suppose  a  case.  You  have  a 
good  and  faithful  servant,  who  feels  happy  in  your  service, 
and  is  perfectly  contented  with  his  fare.  You  promise  him 
with  some  favours  which  you  had  never  before  made  known 
to  him.  He  is  elated  with  the  idea  of  your  goodness,  which 
he  has  never  doubted,  but  did  not  know  till  now  that  it  was 
to  be  manifested  in  this  particular  way.  You  tell  him  that 
a  knowledge  of  this,  with  his  former  knowledge,  '  is  as 
much  as  his  present  welfare  requires.'  He  very  readilv  as- 
sents to  the  truth  of  the  proposition  ;  and  further  adds/it  is 
even  l  more  than  is  necessary  for  his  present  welfare,'  for 
he  was  contented  and  happy  before.  Would  any  rational 
man  say  that  your  servant  talked  unreasonably  ?  Would  he 
say  that  such  reasoning  was  absurd  ?  I  think  not.  Your 
servant  does  not  despise  either  your  goodness  or  your  boun- 
ty ;  he  considers  that  his  master  knows  best,  what  is  best 
for  his  servant ;  and  he  receives  with  gratitude  whatever  is 
bestowed.  Your  argument  would  have  appeared  to  me 
more  just,  if,  after  fully  understanding  me,  which  I  perceive, 
by  the  use  you  have  made  of  the  quotation  from  my  sixth 
number,  you  now  do,  you  had  proved  from  well  known  facts, 
or  from  conclusive  argument,  the  absolute  necessity  of  the 
hope  of  a  christian  in  order  for  the  ;  present  welfare'  of 
mankind.  In  doing  this  you  would  have  ingenuously  refuted 
the  proposition  which  I  say  would  have  been  exactly  right. 

"  You  do  not  seem,  sir,  yet  to  have  fully  understood  me 
as  to  my  object  in  searching  for  truth.  You  ask,  saying, 
1  Do  you  not  appear  to  be  solicitous  to  have  your  doubts  re- 
moved, without  expecting  the  least  advantage  by  it?'  You 
must  know,  sir,  that  this  is  only  on  supposition,  that  my 
doubts  are  founded  in  error;  in  which  case  I  should  reap 
the  advantage,  as  my  object  is  truth.  You  will  recollect 
that  my  first  object  was  to  search  for  moral  truth ;  without 
being  at  all  solicitous  where,  or  on  what  ground  it  shall  be 
found.  Truth  only  is  my  object.  In  this  only  I  feel  at  all 
interested  in  this  argument.  Hence  I  shall  be  just  as  much 
obliged  to'you  to  confirm  me  in  my  doubts,  admitting  they 
11* 


126  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

are  founded  in  truth,  as  I  shall  to  remove  them,  admitting  they 
are  founded  in  error. 

"  I  once  thought  just  as  you,  viz.  that  the  idea  and  con- 
templation of  enjoying  future  life  was  absolutely  necessary 
to  present  enjoyment;  but  I  am  now  fully  convinced;  yea, 
mere,  it  is  absolutely  known  to  be  a  fact;  that  the  idea  i» 
altogether  visionary  and  illusive.  I  admit  that  a  knowledge 
of  the  truth,  so  far  as  the  truth  may  be  known,  is  perfectly 
congenial  with  the  present  happiness  of  mankind  :  though  it 
is  often  the  case  that  a  partial  knowledge  of  the  truth,  in 
relation  to  any  particular  subject,  produces  distress  and 
misery  rather  than  enjoyment.  I  now  am  very  happy  in 
knowing  some  things,  which,  once,  only  the  idea  of  their 
being  true  would  have  given  me  pain.  I  am  inclined  to 
think  that  the  idea  of  now  enjoying  the  pleasures, or  now  en- 
during the  pains  of  a  future  life  is  altogether  chimerical.  I 
can  enjoy  the  life  or  lives  of  others  in  a  future  tense  just  as 
well  *s  I  can  now  enjoy  my  own  future  life.  I  have  as  much 
reason  to  believe  that  rational  intelligence  always  did  exist, 
as  I  have  to  believe  it  always  will  ;  yea,  one  idea  is  just  as 
certain  to  me  as  the  other,  and  no  more  so.  And  as  I  cannot 
reflect  on  the  idea  of  eternity  past,  only  with  a  kind  of  reve- 
rential awe  mingled  with  sublime  pleasure  ;  so  the  idea  of 
eternity  to  come  produces  in  me  the  same  sensation ;  yea, 
feeling  myself  equally  ignorant  of  both,  (which  must  be  the 
case  on  the  supposition  that  revelation  is  not  true.)  I  can 
perceive  no  difference.  I  feel  anxious  to  know,  however, 
every  thing  which  can  be  known  on  this  subject ;  and  yet^  at 
the  same  time,  I  am  inclined  to  think  I  should  doubt  of  every 
revelation  of  which  I  can  have  any  conception,  unless  it 
should  be  so  made  that  I  could  see  its  truth,  (or  at  least  the 
evidences  of  its  truth)  over  and  over'  again,  and  that  they 
should  still  remain  by  me  at  all  times,  so  that  I  could  exam- 
ine them,  and  re-examine  them,  the  same  as  I  now  look 
at  the  stars  in  the  firmament. 

u  Thus  I  have  opened  my  mind  to  you,  more  fully  than  I 
have  ever  done  before,  on  this  subject ;  and  notwithstanding 
your  writings  may  be  very  beneficial  to  others  (as  well  as 
mine,  for  some  may  stand  in  need  of  one,  and  some  of  the 
other)yet,here  comes  up  my  doubts  again, if  I  am  benefited  by 
them,  I  expect  it  will  be  in  a  different  way  than  that  of  be- 
ing any  more  persuaded  of  the  truth  of  divine  revelation. 
Nevertheless,  1  am  no  less  anxious  to  continue  the  corres- 
pondence on  this  account. 


SERIES    OP    LETTERS.  127 

"  Your  address  to  truth,   which  you   arc   pleased  to  put 
into  the  mouth  of  my  argument,  is  closed  with  «d  idea  which 
does  not  grow  out  of  my  hypothesis.     '  The  joyous  expecta- 
tion of  soon  losing  sight  of  thee  (i.  c.  truth)  forever  in  the 
ellysium  of  non  existence  !'     Xon- existence,  sir,  dors  nol 
ist !     Neither  does  the  term  convey   an  idea  to  nv  under- 
standing of  any  thing.     I  know  of  no  existence,  neither  enn 
I  conceive  of  any,  except  that  which  I  believe  to  ho  eternal 
in  its  nature.     And   the  idea  of  something  bein?  formed  or 
made  out  of  nothing,  or  of  something's  returning  to  nothing 
again,  I  have  long  since  exploded.     Every  thu 
excepting  first  principles,  is  liable  to  change.     Hence  arises 
the  various  modes,  stales,  circumstance--,  conditions  and  sit- 
uations in  beings  and  things:  also  their  different  proper 
relations  and  dependences. 

u  1  know  not  whether  consciousness  is  a  being,  or  wbe 
it  be  only  a  mode  of  being.  If  it  be  the  former,  it  always 
did,  and  always  will  exist,  in  some  state  or  other  ;  if  the  lat- 
ter, the  state  of  the  being  may  be  so  changed  that  although 
identity  exists,  yet  consciousness  is  not  there.  And  there  is 
no  more  absurdity  in  this  idea  than  there  is  in  supposing  that 
the  same  matter  which  forms  a  enbe.  may  become  a  globe. 
1  can  as  we'll  conceive  of  a  conscious  being  to  day,  becoming 
unconcious  to-morrow,  as  1  can  conceive  of  a  person  in  a 
sound  sleep.  But  non-existence  (strictly  speaking)  sounds  to 
my  understanding  something  like  the  falsity  of  truth  ! 

"I  now  come  to  your  reply  to  my  sixth  number:  and  in 
my  remarks,  which  will  be  but  few,  1  shall  follow  the  ar- 
rangement which  you  have  made. 

Ct  1st.  The  candid  concessions  which  you  have  made,  and 
the  charity  which  you  have  extended  towards  doubting 
christians,  or  candid  unbelievers  (for  such  1  conceive  there 
may  be)  is  honourable  both  to  yourself  and  to  the  cause 
which  you  have  espoused,  and  your  writing,  of  course,  gains 
a  much  more  favourable  reception  than  the  writings  of  those. 
who  appear  to  be  rilled  with  a  spirit  of  acrimony,  and  are 
ready  at  once  to  deal  out  anathemas  against  every  thing  of 
which  they  cannot  approve.  But,  sir,  you  will  permit  me 
to  say,  we  ought  to  be  cautious,  lest  our  personal  attachment 
to  an  author,  and  his  charitable  feelings  towards  us  be  such, 
as  imperceptibly  to  blind  us  to  correct  reason,  and  cause  us 
to  imbibe  his  errors,  merely  because  they  are  his,  and  mis- 
take them  for  truth. 


128  SERIES   OF   LETTERS. 

"  I  am  well  aware  that  I  should  find  it  difficult  to  prove 
that  I  now  believe  what  I  do  without  a  miracle,  as  you  have 
suggested  ;  for  if  miracles  have  existed  they  may  have,  in- 
directly, more  influence  in  my  mind  than  I  am  at  present 
sensible  of;  and  therefore  I  will  not  undertake  to  say  that  I 
am  not  principally  indebted  to  them  for  my  present  views  of 
the  character  of  the  supreme  Being.  I  am  disposed  to  ac- 
knowledge in  humble  gratitude  all  the  blessings  which  I 
have  received,  and  am  made  sensible  of,  let  them  come  to 
me  by  what  means,  or  through  what  channel  soever.  But  I 
do  not  see  how  you  had  a  right  to  expect  that  I  should  either 
refute,  or  else  acquiesce  in  your  opinion  on  this  subject. — 
What!  must  I  either  prove  that  there  have  been  no  such 
things  as  miracles,  or  else  admit  their  truth  !  Must  I  either 
refute  your  notion  that  they  have  had  great  influence  on  my 
faith  and  practice,  or  else  '  express  my  acquiescence"*  that  such 
is  the  fact !  Hard  lines  !  I  choose  to  take  the  easier  course, 
and  confess  that  I  am  too  ignorant  to  do  either.  I  am  will- 
ing, however,  still  to  be  instructed. 

lt  2d.  I  have  nothing  at  present  to  say  on  the  subject  of 
prophecy  ;  i.  e.  to  reconcile  the  pretensions  to  it  with  the 
honesty  of  the  prophets,  without  admitting  divine  inspira- 
tion, better  than  what  I  have  written  in  my  seventh  num- 
ber. When  I  have  received  your  answer  to  that  I  may  have 
something  more  to  write.  I  would  suggest,  however,  here, 
that  as  you  frequently  make  use  of  the  expression  l  divine 
inspiration,'  I  want  the  expression  more  fully  defined  and 
explained.  I  have  no  distinct  idea,  that  I  know  of,  of  divine 
inspiration.  I  suppose  you  mean  the  same  by  it  which  you 
did  by  the  4  divine  mission,'  given  to  the  apostles,  or  at  least 
something  similar ;  but  still  I  am  ignorant  of  the  subject. 
You  have  sometimes  spoken  of  divine  revelation,  as  though 
it  was  something  distinct  from  this  divine  mission,  and  which 
was  a  proof  of  it ;  but,  you  must  excuse  me,  I  am  still  all  in 
the  dark  about  it.  Do  be  so  good  as  to  inform  me  how  you 
suppose  the  prophets,  or  apostles,  or  even  Jesus,  could  know 
for  a  certainty  that  they  were  divinely  inspired? 

wt  3.  When  I  acknowledged  that  there  are  evidences  in 
favour  of  divine  revelation,  1  did  not  suppose  it  necessary  to 
state  what  those  evidences  are  ;  because,  some  of  them,  to 
say  the  least,  ore  very  apparent.  The  bare  report  of  any 
thing,  I  conceive  to  be  evidence  of  the  report's  being  true  ; 
and  would  be  sufficient  to  acquire  belief  should  nothing  arise 
in  the  mind  to  counterbalance  it  :  and  as  I  had  repeatedly 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  129 

promised  to  give  you  the  reasons  for  my  doubts  I  expected 
to  have  been  indulged  a  little  longer  before  I  should  have 
been  again  faulted  on  this  subject.  Bat  a«  it  respects  this 
matter  I  am  all  patience  and  submission,  if  it  may  be  so  that 
truth  shall  finally  come  to  light. 

"  Under  this  article  you  have  gone  into  a  very  lengthy 
discussion  to  shew  that  the  evidence  by  which  the  apostles 
believed  in  the  resurretion  could  not  be  counterbalanced,  &c. 
And  if  I  understand  what  you  have  written  it  amounts  in  my 
mind  to  about  the  following,  viz.  The  apostles  could  not 
have  been  convinced  of  the  fact  of  the  resurrection  by  any 
evidence  short  of  the  fact  itself.  2dly.  If  the  fact  did  exist 
there  is  no  evidence  which  can  conterbalance  it.  Ergo.  As 
the  apostles  were  convinced  of  the  truth,  the  fact  did  exist. 
This  is  pretty  much  like  saying,  if  the  fact  were  true,  it 
could  not  have  been  false  !  But  I  spoke  of  the  evidence  in 
relation  to  ourselves  rather  than  the  tiponlei  :  we  believe  or 
disbelieve  for  ourselves,  and  by  such  evidence  as  we  have. 
You  think  if  twelve  men  should  testify  in  favour  of  a  resur- 
rection, and  the  body  could  not  be  found,  '  various  opinions 
would  result  from  such  evidence.1  If  so,  some  might  be- 
lieve, the  account  true;  and  they  might  persuade  others  to 
believe  it  ;  and  only  let  it  be  reported  and  believed  that 
some  one  had  died  for  the  truth  of  it,  and  it  would  make  no 
difference  after  this,  as  it  respects  the  influence  of  faith, 
whether  the  account  was  true  or  false. 

*;  You  will  excuse  me  for  making  no  further  remarks  on 
what  you  have  written  under  this  article  liil  yon  have  an- 
swered my  seventh  number,  aud  also  given  me  a  more  clear 
definition  of  divine  inspiration, 

"4.  What  you  have  written  under  the  fourth  article, 
generally  speaking,  is  satisfactory,  till  j  come  to  the  lasl 
sentence  ;  and  even  with  that  I  have  not  much  fault  to 
charge  you  with.  It  is  true  we  may  be  mistakrn  as  to  our 
ideas  ot  the  eternity  or  immutability  of  any  thing:  but  then, 
as  it  respects  argument,  it  is  just  as  well  as  though  we  were 
correct,  as  no  one  can  prove  us  otherwise  ;  no,  oof  even 
raise  a  reasonable  doubt  on  the  subject.  But  even  if  it  could 
be  demonstrated  that  there  is  not  a  rational  being  now  in  the 
universe  who  existed  two  ccntt;iies  ago,  or  one  who  will  ex- 
ist two  centuries  hence,  I  conceive,  as  the  fact  could  not,  so 
the  knowledge  of  the  fact  ought  not  to  make  any  difference 
in  the  relation,  dependence  and  moral  obligation  between 
man  and  man.     Man  learns  by  his  own  experience,  as  well 


130  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

as  from  the  experience  of  others ;  and  vice  versa  ;  hence  we 
profit  by  the  experience  of  those  who  have  gone  before  us. 

u  When  man  shall  universally  learn  this  great  moral  truth 
that  much  of  his  happiness  is  inseparably  connected  with 
the  happiness  of  his  fellow  beings,  which  is  one  of  the  im- 
mutable principles  of  moral  nature,  then  each  individual 
will  strive  to  the  utmost  to  promote  the  general  welfare  ; 
for  in  so  doing-  he  increases  his  own  individual  happiness, 
and  also  the  happiness  of  posterity. 

"  5.  What  you  have  said  under  the  fifth  article,  for  rea- 
sons already  given,  will  be  considered  in  my  next  number, 
when  I  hope  I  shall  be  furnished  with  more  light  on  the 
subject. 

41  1  will  only  observe  here  that  a  miracle,  as  I  conceive, 
must  be  performed  agreeable  to,  or  else  it  must  be  a  viola- 
tion of  the  laws  of  nature.  If  the  former,  whatever  it  might 
be  to  others,  to  those  who  understood  the  means  of  its  oper- 
ation, it  could  be,  strictly  speaking,  no  miracle ;  and  if  no 
miracle,  no  evidence,  to  them,  of  divine  inspiration  :  but  if 
the  latter,  and  those  who  performed  the  same  were  ignorant 
of  the  power  by  which  they  were  performed,  I  do  not  see 
how  that  the  performance  of  a  miracle  could  give  them  any 
knowledge  of  futurity.  And  if  not,  what  did  give  it  to  them, 
and  in  what  way  was  it  given  ? 

"  It  will  stiil  be  recollected  that  I  do  not  admit  the  exis- 
tence of  miracles,  although  I  speak  of  them  as  though  they 
were  true,  merely  to  shew  that  even  if  they  were  true  I 
should  still  have  my  difficulties  respecting  the  truth  of  divine 
revelation. 

"  6th.  Your  remarks  under  the  sixth  article  are  satisfac- 
tory.though  they  have  not  convinced  me  of  the  incorrectness 
of  my  opinion  ;  because  that  which  is  founded  in  truth  is,  af- 
ter ail  the  only  thing  that  is  '  good  and  nourishing'  to  the 
understanding.  The  sound  mind  pants  only  after  truth  ;  and 
as  he  knows  eternal  truth  is  unalterable,  he  is  not  foolish 
enough  even  to  desire,  it  should  be  what  it  is  not.  The 
reason  why  we  often  desire  that  which  we  cannot  have  is  be- 
cause, not  knowing  the  whole  truth,  we  do  not  know  but 
that  we  may  have  the  things  we  desire. 
"  7th.  As  it  respects  'not  even  deserving  a  future  existence,' 
I  was  not  fully  understood.  I  only  meant  an  anxious  desire, 
as  I  expressed  a  little  before,  and  as  also  I  expressed  anxious 
concern  a  little  after  ;  that  is  a  desire  which  is  incompatible 
with  reconciliation  to  truth  whether  that  truth  gives  us  little 


SERIES   OF    LETTERS.  131 

or  much.  Had  not  truth  been  favourable  to  our  existence 
we  certainly  should  not  have  existed;  and  I  can  see  no  rea- 
son to  fear  a  truth  which  has  been  so  favourable  as  to  give 
us  being-.  It  is  true,  a  desire  to  exist  as  long  as  we  can  enjov 
life  seems  to  be  inseparably  connected  with  our  moral  na- 
ture ;  and  yet  I  can  see  no  terror  in  that  which  takes  away 
our  sensibility,  whether  it  be  for  a  night,  for  ages,  or  for  e- 
ternity.  I  should  just  as  soon  think  of  being  terrified  at  the 
idea  of  a  sound  and  sweet  sleep.  If  the  truth  be  what  I  sus- 
pect it  is,  I  see  no  good  reason  why  it  should  be  revealed 
to  us,  any  more  than  the  hour  of  our  death  !  This  truth  is 
wisely  concealed  from  us. 

u  8th.  You  have  seen  me  so  long  in  the  dark  that  I  begin 
to  doubt  whether  you  would  be  willing  to  own  me  correct, 
even  if  I  should  come  fully  into  the  light ;  i.  e  according  to 
your  understanding.  Is  it  possible  sir,  that  you  should  sup- 
pose me  capable  of  writing  so  great  a  solecism  as  the  follow- 
ing; viz.  If  a  revelation  were  ever  necessary,  it  was  ne- 
cessary only  to  convince  mankind  that  a  revelation  is  not 
true  !  But  it  seems  that  such  must  have  been  your  construc- 
tion, or  very  near  it,  or  else  you  could  not  have  found  the 
error  of  so  great  magnitude,  of  which  you  speak.  Although 
I  did  not  express  my  idea  so  full  and  explicit  as  I  might,  and 
perhaps  ought  to  have  done,  yet  I  can  assure  you  that,  by  re- 
conciling man  to  his  present  state,  I  meant  nothing  less  than 
what  you  have  expressed  in  a  former  letter  ;  and  I  meant  to 
include  all  for  which  you  have  contended  in  the  article  now 
under  consideration.  For  1st.  If  divine  revelation  were  ne- 
cessary, the  thing  revealed  is  undoubtedly  true.  2d.  If 
true,  I  am  fully  satisfied  with  your  views  on  the  subject. 

u  9th.  Your  explanation  relative  to  what  you  suggested  in 
a  former  letter  (i.  e*  that  I  must  mean  that  the  apostles  stated 
falsehood)  is  satisfactory;  though  what  you  now  say  you  meant, 
as  I  have  already  informed  you,  was  not  exactly  my  mean- 
ing. The  fact  is,  I  did  not  mean  to  express  any  opinion 
as  to  the  truth  or  to  the  falsity  of  the  apostles'  testimony.  I 
very  readily  grant,  however,  that,  if  1  'do  not  believe  that 
they  stated  the  truth' c  I  must  believe  that  they  stated  false- 
hood ;'  unless  (which  would  be  very  extraordinary)  the 
weight  of  evidence  be  so  exactly  balanced  in  my  mind  that 
it  is  impossible  for  me  to  form  an  opinion  on  the  subject. — 
But  supposing  I  disbelieved  their  testimony  altogether; 
what  could  I  do  more  than  to  give  my  reasons  for  not  believ- 
ing it  ?     Would  it  be  reasonable  to  call  on  me  to  prove  their 


3  32  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

testimony  false  ?     It  i*  a  very  linn]  thing  to  pr^ve  a  nega- 
tive J 

"  You  will  have  already  perceived  by  my  seventh  num- 
ber that  I  have  no  idea  that  the  fact?  on  which  the  christian 
religion  is  said  to  have  been,  founded  can  now  be  proved 
false.  No,  whatever  might  have. been  the  case  in  the  time 
of  it,  they  were  neglected  too  long  before  any  attempt  of 
this  kind  was;  made,  though  the  accounts  should  have  been 
supposed  ever  so  erroneous  as,  to  promise  any  success  in 
their  refutation.  And  I  am  inclined  to  think  thj»t  one  centu- 
ry then  would  involve  facts  in  as  much  obscurity  as  five  cen- 
turies would  now.  But  I  have  already  expressed  my  doubts 
whether  the  facts  on  which  the  religion  of  the  Shakers  is 
said  to  be  predicated,  although  not  half  a  century  standing, 
'Mn  now  be  proved  false  ;  and  yet  if  they  are  true  they  are 
nothing  short  of  miraculous. 

"  The  christian  religion  therefore,  true  or  false,  undoubt- 
edly will  stand,  in  some  shape  or  other,  and  be  believed 
more  or  less,  as  long  as  man  remains  upon  the  earth.  For 
if  it  was  introduced  without  any  violations  of  the  laws  of  na- 
ture', i.  e.  without  miracles,  which  probably  was  the  case,  if 
false,  we  cannct  expect  any  such  violations  for  the  sake  of 
destroying  it ;  and  without  such  violations  I  do  not  see  how 
it  could  be  destroyed,  because  the  believers  of  it,  invariably, 
believe  it  to  be  established  on  such  mysterious  supernatural 
principles  ;  and  1  expect  but  very  few,  comparatively,  will 
ever  have  sufficient  strength  of  mind  to  throw  off  the  mystic 
veil. 

»  Yours,  &c.  A.  KNEELAND." 


LETTER  VI L 

Dear  si'r^  and  brother — Desiring  to  bring  our  present  cor- 
respondence to  a  close  as  soon  as  the  merits  of  its  subject 
will  admit,  I  propose  in  replying  to  your  8th  number,  to  re- 
mark only  on  the  most  essential  particulars,  taking  no  par- 
ticular notice  of  two  classes  contained  in  your  communica- 
tion, viz.  that  which  seems  to  grow  out  of  a  misconstruction 
of  my  arguments  and  that  in  which  you  appear  to  agree 
with  them.  Indulging  in  this  liberty,  the  subjects  to  which 
I  will  endeavour  to  confirm  myself  are  the  following. 

1st.  Your  method  of  accounting  for  the  absence  of  the 
crucified  Jesus,  form  the  sepulchre  where  it  was  laid  and 
guarded  by  the  Roman  soldiere. 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  ]  33 

'2d.  V?baft  you  suggest  respecting  the  divine  mission  of 
Christ  and  his  apostles,  the  miracles  which  were  wrought  by 
them  in  attestation  of  the  Messiah,  and  the  credibility  of 
their  testimony  .regarding  a  future  state. 

3d.  What  you  contend  for  respecting  the  utility,  or  inutil- 
ity of  the  christian  hope  of  future  felicity. 

4th.  Something  on  the  instructions  of  Jesus  to  his  disciples 
respecting  their  conduct  toward  their  enemies. 

5th.  What  you  suggest  respecting  Jesus'  not  being  known 
to  the  two  disciples,  &c. 

6th.  Your  criticism  on  my  argument  respecting  the  evi- 
dences of  the  resurrection,  &,c. 

1st.  You  propose  to  account  for  the  absence  of  the  body 
of  Jesus,  by  supposing,  that  some  persons  by  frightening  the 
guards  were  enabled  thereby  to  convey  the  body  away, 
which  they  did  being  willing  that  Jesus  should  be  thought  to 
have  risen  from  the  dead,  whereby  he  would  be  deified, 
according  to  the  notions  of  the  Greeks  respecting  deifying 
men  after  they  were  dead,  &c.  Those  who  thus  stole  the 
body  were  not  the  disciples  of  Jesus,  but  some  persons  who 
were  desirous  thereby  to  punish  the  Jews  for  so  cruelly  put- 
ting Jesus  to  death. 

Here  you  have  proposed  two  subjects  as  forming  the 
cause,  in  the  mind  of  those  who  stole  the  body,  of  their  un- 
dertaking so  hazarduous  an  enterprise,  neither  of  which  ap- 
pears to  me  to  wear  the  necessary  marks  of  probability. — 
1st.  If  they  wished  to  have  Jesus  deified  according  to  the 
notions  of  the  Greeks,  there  was  no  need  of  establishing  the 
belief  of  his  having  rose  from  the  dead.  This  .was  not  the 
case  with  those  who  among  the  Greeks  were  deified  after 
their  death.  The  tombs  of  their  heroes  whom  they  placed 
among  the  gods,  remained  among  the  people. 

2d.  Who  that  then  lived  in  Jerusalem  or  its  vicinity  could 
look  on  the  crucifixion  of  Jesus  as  an  act  of  cruelty  ?  Oth- 
ers than  Jews  would  not  feel  very  much  interested  in  this 
affair,  as  Jesus  had  confined  his  ministry  to  the  Jews,  and  di« 
rected  his  disciples  not  to  enter  into  any  of  the  cities  of  the 
Gentiles,  this  matter  was  a  case  which  seemed  to  concern 
the  Jews  only.  Now  look  at  the  case.  The  Jews  expect- 
ed a  Messiah,  a  deliverer,  one  who  should  become  their 
prince,  and  deliver  them  from  the  bondage  of  the  Romans. 
Jesus  pretended  to  be  sent  of  God  as  their  Messiah  of  whom 
the  ancient  prophets  had  spoken ;  he  pretended  to  work 
miracles'iQ  confirmation  of  his  divine  mission  ;  but  in  rootr. 
12 


134  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

of  delivering  the  Jews  from  (he  Roman  yoke,  he  prophe- 
cied  of  their  destruction  by  the  Romans.  Now,  sir,  if  Jesus 
made  all  these  pretensions  without  divine  authority  for  so 
doing,  if  he  caused  to  be  reported  that  he  wrought  miracles 
when  he  never  wrought  one  in  his  life,  if  he  kept  the  peo- 
ple in  a  continual  uproar  driving  about  the  country  from  one 
extreme  of  Palestine  to  another  all  by  his  frauds  and  faci- 
nating  deceptions  j  and  in  order  to  quiet  the  people,  and 
have  things  go  on  in  a  regular  order,  those  who  were  charg- 
ed with  the  public  concerns  brought  about  the  crucifixion  of 
this  impostor,  who  knowing  all  these  things,  being  a  Jew 
would  think  of  accusing  these  godly  pharisees  and  rulers  of 
cruelty  for  so  doing?  If  Jesus  did  not  do  the  works  which 
he  pretended  to  do,  he  certainly  was  an  impostor,  and  it  is 
in  vain  to  attempt  to  save  him  from  such  a  charge.  And  if 
he  were  such  a  blasphemous  impostor  as  to  pretend  to  work 
miracles  by  the  power  of  God,  when  he  knew  he  had  no 
such  power,  i(  appears  very  plain  that  he  deserved  to  die 
according  to  Jewish  customs.  If  the  miracles  of  Jesus  had 
been  of  a  different  description,  there  might  have  been  some 
deception.  That  is,  if  such  miracles  had  been  pretended  as 
you  state  of  the  Shakers  ;  in  such  a  case  nobody  would  trou- 
ble their  heads  about  the  matter.  Some  would  say,  the 
good  woman  perhaps  was  baJiy  hurt,  and  she  thought  her 
ribs  were  broken,  when  in  fact  they  were  not,  and  with  a 
little  good  nursing  she  was  able  to  join  the  dance  ;  others 
might  be  extravagant  enough  to  suppose  that  something 
marvelous  had  taken  place,  but  who  would  know  ?  Or,  1 
will  add,  who  would  care  ?  But  will  you  undertake  to  argue 
that  the  most  learned  and  artful  could  impose  on  people  by 
pretending  to  have  power  from  God  to  open  the  eyes  of  the 
blind,  to  heal  all  manner  of  diseases  with  a  word,  and  to 
raise  the  dead  from  their  graves  ?  No,  sir,  if  Jesus  did  not 
perform  the  miracles  which  he  pretended  to  perform,  there 
is  no  propriety  in  believing  that  any  body  was  disposed  to 
charge  the  Jews  with  cruelty  for  ridding  community  of 
such  an  impostor,  f>ut  after  all,  even  allowing  your  pro- 
posed method  of  accounting  for  the  absence  of  the  body, 
which  by  no  means  is  half  as  probable  a  story  as  that  re- 
ported by  the  Jews,  as  this  does  not  account  for  the  disciples' 
believing  that  Jesus  had  actually  arose  from  the  dead.  What 
is  to  be  done  with  this  circumstance  ?  Are  we  to  suppose 
that  as  soon  as  the  disciples  found  that  the  body  was  missing, 
they  took  it  into  their  heads  that  he  had  actually  arose  from 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  135 

the  dead  without  any  further  evidence  ?  Well  if  they  rea- 
ly  helieved  it  they  could  honestly  state  their  belief  to  the 
people.  You  will  remember  that  you  have  agreed  that  the 
apostles  were  honest  men.  But  then  the  apostles  go  fur- 
ther, they  assert  that  they  were  certified  of  the  real  resur- 
rection of  Jesus  by  many  infallible  proofs,  that  they  saw  him, 
conversed  with  him,  ate  with  him,  heard  his  discourses  in 
which  he  expounded  the  scriptures  of  the  law,  of  the  pro- 
phets, and  of  the  psalms  which  respected  his  passion  and 
resurrection.  Will  you  allow  these  men  to  have  been  hon- 
est men,  and  still  suppose  that  somebody  stole  the  body  of 
Jesus  from  the  sepulchre?  The  boldness  of  the  disciples  in 
declaring-  the  resurrection  ;  their  willingness  to  suffer  all 
manner  of  persecutions  for  the  name  of  Jesus,  show  plainly 
that  they  did  believe  in  his  resurrection.  Here  1  refer 
you  to  my  former  arguments  in  which  I  have  attempted  to 
make  it  appear  that  the  disciples  could  not  have  been  de- 
ceived. 

But  even  allowing,  that  the  body  was  stolen,  and  that  the 
disciples  were  deceived,  there  is  still,  if  possible,  a  greater 
difficulty  to  account  for,  viz.  the  success  of  the  preaching  of 
Jesus  and  him  crucified.  Here  I  wish,  in  a  special  manner, 
to  call  your  attention.  The  four  evangelists  and  the  acts  of 
the  apostles  were  written  in  the  life  time  of  the  disciples  of 
Jesus  ;  this,  Paley,  in  his  Evidences  of  Christianity,  fully 
proves.  He  likewise  proves  beyond  any  reasonable  doubt 
that  they  were  written  by  the  men  whose  names  they  bear. 
These  historians  then  relate  all  the  miracles  recorded  in  the 
four  gospels,  and  inform  us  that  Jesus  actually  performed 
them.  They  give  each  of  them  an  account  of  the  crucifix- 
ion and  resurrection  of  their  divine  master.  They  relate 
the  things  of  which  they  were  eve  witnesses.  But  suppos- 
ing they  were  deceived, which  I  humbly  conceive, is  not  sup- 
posable,  can  we  reasonably  believe  that  these  gospels  in 
which  such  barefaced  falsehoods  were  recorded  would  ever 
gain  credit  among  a  people  whose  religious  education  was  to 
be  all  overthrown  by  coming  into  the  belief  of  those  wri- 
tings ? 

But  the  apostles  had  not  these  books  to  assist  them  in  their 
ministry;  they  went  on  in  preaching  Jesus  and  the  resurrec- 
tion, first  in  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  and  throughout  all  Judea, 
and  among  the  Gentiles  with  astonishing  success  before  they 
wrote  the  accounts  which  we  have.  Now,  sir,  on  the  sup- 
position that  the  body   was  stolen   will  you  account  for  the 


136  SERIES   OF    LETTERS. 

people's  being  persuaded  that  Jesus  rose  from  ihe  dead? — 
Is  it  possible  to  conceive  of  any  thing  to  which  the  Jewc 
could  have  been  more  opposed,  than  to  the  testimony,  that 
the  man  whom  they  had  crucified  was  the  Messiah,  and  that 
God  had  raised  him  from  the  dead?  Now  turn  to  the  ac- 
count given  in  Acts,  chap.  ii.  and  let  reason  and  candor  have 
their  voice  in  the  matter  under  consideration.  "  Therefore 
let  all  the  house  of  Israel  know  assuredly,  that  God  hath 
made  that  same  Jesus,  whom  ye  have  crucified,  both  Lord 
and  Christ."  Can  you  conceive  of  any  thing  that  could 
have  been  more  trying  to  the  feelings  of  the  peopie  ?  Ob- 
serve, "  whom  ye  have  crucified."  Bring  the  matter  home 
to  yourself.  Suppose  you  had  been  active  in  the  prosecu- 
tion of  one  of  your  fellow  creatures,  and  the  prosecution 
should  have  terminated  in  the  execution  of  the  accused,  how 
would  it  try  your  feelings  for  your  neighbours  to  come  and 
u  ]]  you,  that  you  had  been  the  murderer  of  a  good  and  in- 
nocent man  ?  But  in  the  case  under  consideration  there  are 
(.iTvamstarxes  that  heighten  the  importance  of  the  subject. 
The  great  Messiah  in  which  all  the  Jews  were  educated  to 
believe,  as  much  as  we  are  educated  to  believe  in  Christ ; 
this  personage  is  the  subject.  See  the  account,  "  Now, 
when  they  heard  this,  they  were  pricked  in  their  heart,  and 
said  unto  Peter,  and  to  the  rest'  of  the  apostles,  men  and 
brethren,  what  shall  we  do  ?"  Why  do  we  hear  this  excla- 
mation ?  "  Men  and  brethren,  what  shall  we  do?"  Why 
should  the  people  now  feel  thus  affected  ?  Why  do  they 
not  cry  out  against  the  men  who  accuse  them  of  having  done 
this  wickedness,  as  they  did  against  Jesus  a  few  days  before  ? 
Can  you,  sir,  believe  that  all  that  caused  this,  was  the  body's 
having  been  stolen  from  the  sepulchre,  the  disciples  having 
gotten  the  whim  into  their  heads  that  Jesus  had  arose  from 
the  dead,  now  run  about  like  mad  men  and  accuse  the  peo- 
ple of  having  murdered  the  great  Messiah,  the  anointed  of 
God,  affirming  that  God  had  raised  him  from  the  dead,  when 
barely  the  absence  of  the  dead  body  was  all  the  evidence  on 
which  this  could  be  founded  ?  Not  only  did  the  testimony  of 
Peter,  on  this  occasion,  which  will  remain  a  most  memorable 
one  while  the  world  stands,  carry  pungent  conviction  to  the 
very  hearts  of  the  people,  but  it  happily  issued  in  the  glo- 
rious triumph  of  faith  in  the  risen  Jesus  in  about  three  thou- 
sand of  the  then  present  audience. 

In  the  fore  part  of  this  chapter  we  have  an  account  of  the 
manifestation  of  the  mighty  and  miraculous  power  of  God 


SERIES    OF    LETTElfB.  J  37 

which  was  the  evident  cause  of  the  conviction  of  the  peo- 
ple ;  and  to  no  other  cause,  I  humbly  conceive,  can  we  im- 
pute such  consequences. 

Permit  me  to  remark  here,  that  all  that  ingenuity  has 
ever  invented  about  how  the  body  of  Jesus  was  disposed  of, 
can  have  no  weight  at  all  against  the  doctrine  of  the  resur- 
rection which  the  apostles  propagated.  The  body's  being 
absent  from  the  sepulchre  never  convinced  one  reasonable 
being  in  the  world,  of  the  fact  of  the  resurrection.  It  did 
not  convince  those  who  first  saw  the  sepulchre  empty. 

"  Mary  stood  without  at  the  sepulchre  weeping  ;  and  they 
(the  angels)  say  unto  her,  woman,  why  weepestthou  ?  She 
saith  unto  him,  because  they  have  taken  away  my  Lord,  and 
I  know  not  where  they  have  laid  him.  And  when  she  had 
thus  said,  she  turned  herself  back,  and  saw  Jesus  standing, 
and  knew  not  that  it  was  Jesus.  Jesus  saith  unto  her,  wo- 
man, why  weepest  thou?  Whom  seekest  thou  ?  She  sup- 
posing him  to  be  the  gardner.  saith  unto  him,  sir,  if  thou 
have  borne  him  hence,  tell  me  where  thou  hast  laid  him, 
and  I  will  take  him  away.  Jesus  saith  unto  her,  Mary." 
She  replied,  "Rabboni!*'  How  naturally  is  this  account 
given.  In  what  an  artless  manner  is  the  story  told.  I  so 
much  admire  the  sincerity  and  unaffected  love  of  Mary  to 
her  master  that  the  following  reflections  demand  a  place 
here.  The  person  who  but  three  days  before  was  crowned 
with  thorns,  was  reviled  and  spat  upon,  was  most  ignomin- 
iously  crucified  between  two  thieves  and  laid  in  the  sepul- 
chre is  so  much  the  object  of  Mary's  affection  that  she  appears 
solicitous  for  the  body.  I  cannot  doubt  the  truth  of  Mary's 
being  here,  for  the  story  is  told  without  any  design.  But 
why  is  Mary  here  ?  If  Jesus  was  an  impostor  she  never 
knew  of  his  working  a  miracle  in  her  life.  But  if  Jesus  was 
in  fact  what  he  pretended  to  be  and  if  he  wrought  those 
miracles  which  are  recorded  of  him,  all  is  explained.  But  it 
is  evident  that  Mary  had  not  thought  of  Jesus'  having  been 
raised  from  the  dead,  when  she  saw  that  he  was  absent  from 
the  sepulchre.  When  Jesus  spake  to  her,  and  called  her  by 
name  as  he  had  frequently  done  before,  she  knew  him. 
When  this  Mary  and  the  other  women  that  were  with  her 
went  to  the  eleven,  and  told  them  the  story,  they  did  not  be- 
lieve it,  nor  does  it  appear  that  Peter  believed  in  the  resur- 
rection, even  after  Mary  and  others  had  certified  him,  and 
he  had  been  himself  to  the  sepulchre  and  found  it  empty ; 
1?* 


138  SERIES    OF   LETTER- 

bat  he  went  away  "  wondering  in  himself  at  that  which  w.r 
come  to  pass." 

The  evidences  by  which  the  disciples  believed  in  this  all- 
important  truth  were  equal  to  its  importance  and  to  its  ex- 
traordinary character.  These  evidences  have  been  no- 
ticed. 

2d.  The  mission  of  Christ  and  his  apostles,  the  miracles 
wrought  by  them  in  attestation  of  that  mission,  and  the  cre- 
dibility of  their  testimony  respecting  a  future  state  may  now 
receive  some  notice. 

You  are  disposed  to  call  on  me  to  inform  you  what  I  mean 
by  this  mission,  to  which  I  reply  ;  1  mean  a  divine  appoint- 
ment to  act  in  a  certain  official  character,  accompanied  with 
certain  powers  by  which  they  were  enabled  to  evince,  by  mir- 
acles, this  their  appointment. 

Jesus  was  appointed  by  God  himself  to  reveal  the  divine 
character,  nature,  and  will  of  the  Father  to  the  world,  by 
his  preaching,  by  his  miracles  of  mercy,  by  his  sufferings, 
by  his  death  and  resurrection.  The  apostles  were  sent  by 
Jesus  Christ  on  the  same  mission,  on  which  Jesus  himself 
was  sent.  See  his  prayer,  John  xvii.  "  As  thou  has  sent 
me  into  the  world,  even  so  have  I  also  sent  them  into  the 
world."  Those  who  believed  in  Jesus,  and  acknowledged 
him  to  be  the  Messiah,  believed  on  account  of  the  miracles 
which  he  wrought,  and  as  I  have  before  argued,  Jesus  never 
required  of  any  a  belief  in  him,  barely  on  his  testimony  of 
himself,  but  on  the  evidence  afforded  by  the  works  which  he 
did  in  his  Father's  name.  So  likewise,  those  who  believed 
on  Jesus  through  the  ministry  of  the  apostles,  never  were 
called  on  to  believe  but  by  the  authority  of  as  great  wonders 
as  were  wrought  by  Christ  himself.  I  need  not  say  much  on 
this  particular,  as  you  must  know  that  the  ground  on  which 
I  have  here  placed  this  subject,  is  the  ground  on  which  the 
New  Testament  places  it. 

The  absurd  notions  which  have  been  erroneously  adopted 
by  christian  doctors  and  councils  concerning  the  mission  of 
Christ  to  appease  the  divine  wrath,  to  reconcile  God  to  man, 
to  suffer  the  penalty  of  the  divine  law,  &c.  &c.  which  have 
rendered  the  gospel  a  mystery  and  a  mist,  in  room  of  a  high 
way  for  the  ransomed  of  the  Lord  to  return  to  Zion  in, 
iis  chargeable  to  the  enemy  who  sowed  tares  among  the 
wheat.  These  opinions  with  a  multitude  of  studied  inven- 
tions about  a  mysterious  work  of  sovereign  elective  grace 
wrought  in  certain  individuals,  in   an  unknown   way  and 


SERIES   OF    LETTERS.  139 

frequently  in  an  unknown  time  all  which  is  to  be  followed  by 
a  system  of  mysterious  sanctification,  connected  most  myste- 
riously  with  final  perseverance,  together  with  all  the  intri- 
cate unknown  items  set  down  in  the  Westminister  Catechism, 
have  only  served  to  perplex  some,  puff  others  up  with  spir- 
itual pride  and  exalt  them  in  the  kingdom  of  spiritual 
wickedness  in  high  places,  to  drive  some  to  despair,  and  to 
disgust  reason  and  common  sense  in  others.  There  is  not  a 
word  of  all  the  above  jargon  in  the  sacred  scriptures,  which 
give  us  a  most  rational  account  of  the  gfeal  object  of  the 
gospel  ministry.  This  object  is  the  redemption  of  mankind 
from  moral  darkness,  which  is  the  whole  occasion  of  moral 
evil,  and  to  produce  that  improvement  in  the  religious  world 
which  science  id  designed  to  effect  in  the  political.  It  is  to 
bring  truth  to  light,  to  commend  the  character  of  God  to 
man,  to  lead  all  men  into  the  true  knowledge,  spirit,  and 
temper  of  the  divine  nature.  Thus  we  discover  in  Jesu<  no 
partialist;  no  sectarian,  no  friend  to  any  one  denomination, 
more  than  another.  And  when  he  had  accomplished,  by  his 
sufferings,  what  the  prophet-  hn*d  foretold,  he  Hiefl  sent  his 
gospel  of  the  love  and  mercy  of  God  to  the  whole  world. 
His  divinely  inspired  apostles  followed  the  examples  of  their 
leader  and  preached  the  universal,  impartial  goodness  of 
God  to  all  men,  and  confirmed  their  mission  by  similar  mira- 
cles to  those  wrought  by  Jesus. 

You  further  inquire  the  grounds  on  which  we  are  to  be- 
lieve Jesus  and  his  apostles  respecting  i  future  state.  Re- 
ply, on  the  same  ground  en  which  we  rxslietre  them  in  other 
matters,  viz.  because  they  have  proved  the  divinity  of  their 
mission  or  appointment  to  teach  truth  by  the  power  of  the 
God  of  truth.  See  2  Cor.  xii.  12,  "  Truly  the  signs  of  an 
apostle  were  wrought  among  you  in  all  patience, in  signs, and 
wonders,  and  mighty  deeds."  You  need  not  be  told  that  an 
apostle  is  a  messenger,  and  that  a  messenger  must  have  a  mis- 
sion. What  then  were  the  signs  of  St.  Paul's  mission  ?  An- 
swer, patience,  signs,  wonders,  and  mighty  deeds.  Jesus  is 
said  to  be  the  great  apostle,  and  high  priest  of  our  profession, 
and  he  evinced  his  apo^tleship  by  signs,  by  wonders,  and 
mighty  deeds.  Now,  sir,  as  tho«e  signs  were  designed  to 
prove  to  us  that  Jeses  and  his  apostle^  were  divinely  inspir- 
ed, so  they  are  the  ground  on  which  we  may  safely  believe 
their  tcstimmy  in  ail  things. 

If  your  mqurry  extends  further  than  the  plain  statements 
Rhd  iacts  go,  you  will  nl  once  see  that  they  go  beyond  it  r 


140  SERIES    OF   LETTERS. 

■ 
demand*  of  reason,  for  it  is<in  unreasonable  thing  to  require 
of  an  uninspired  person  any  further  account  concerning  the 
way  by  which  an  inspired  man  knows  what  he  says  to  be 
true,  than  it  has  pleased  God  to  enable  his  messenger  to 
make  known. 

When  the  pharisees  asked  the  man  who  was  born  blind, 
to  whom  Jesus  had  given  sight,  "  What  say  est  thou  of  him  ? 
that  he  hath  opened  thine  eyes?  he  said,  he  is  a  prophet.1" 
How  comes  this  man  to  believe  that  Jesus  was  a  prophet  ? 
Because  the  sign  of  a  messenger  of  God  had  been  given.  If 
the  pharisees  had  asked  him,  how  he  knew  that  Jesus  was  a 
prophet,  would  he  not  answer  them  by  the  miracle  wrought 
upon  him  ?  If  they  should  further  ask  him  of  particulars, 
how  Jesus  could  be  a  prophet,  how  he  knew  things  which 
others  did  not  know,  would  they  have  discovered  any  wis- 
dom in  their  questions  ?  or  would  he  have  discovered  any  in 
attempting  to  answer  them  ? 

If  I  may  further  remark  on  the  mission  of  Jesus  and  his 
apostles,  it  seems  reasonable  to  say  that  it  comprehends  the 
whole  doctrine  of  the  gospel,  that  is  to  say,  they  were  ap- 
pointed to  preach  the  gospel  which  comprehends  the  whole 
ministry  of  reconciliation,  or  a  manifestation  of  reconciling 
truth.  There  is,  therefore,  no  truth  in  the  gospel  which  is 
not  calculated  in  its  nature  to  reconcile  man  to  God,  when 
such  truth  is  understood. 

If  our  heavenly  Father  had  from  all  eternity  predestinat- 
ed far  the  greatest  part  of  mankind  to  a  state  of  endless  un- 
reconciliation,  the  revelation  of  this  to  them  who  were  thus 
destined,  could  have  no  effect  in  reconciling  them  to  God. 
What  had  Jesus  or  his  apostles  to  do  with  such  doctrine  as 
this  ?  Nothing.  They  make  no  mention  of  any  such  thing. 
If  according  to  the  vain  traditions  received  from  the  wisdom 
of  this  world  that  cometh  to  nought,  our  tender  babes  were 
doomed  to  everlasting  wrath  for  the  sin  of  the  first  man  who 
lived  on  earth,  the  manifestation  of  such  a  truth  could  recon- 
cile none  of  those  victims  to  this  God  of  unmerciful  ven- 
geance. But  what  had  Jesus  to  do  with  such  blasphemous 
doctrine  ?  See  him  as  the  representative  of  God,  as  the 
great  apostle  of  heaven  to  man,  notice  what  he  does  and 
what  he  says.  He  takes  young  children  in  his  arms  and 
blesses  them,  he  says  suffer  little  children,  and  forbid  them 
not  to  come  unto  me,  for  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 
If  our  Creator  was  full  of  wrath  and  vindictive  vengeance 
towards  sinners,  the  manifestation  of  such  a  truth  would  by 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  141 

no  means  reconcile  sinners  to  God  ;  but  when  God  coinmend- 
eth  his  love  towards  the  sinner  through  the  mission,  ministry, 
or  dispensation  of  Jesus  Christ,  such  truth  when  revealed, 
naturally  reconciles  the  sinner  to  God.  God  is  eternally  the 
same,  his  love  is  the  same,  his  will  to  do  his  creatures  good 
is  always  the  same,  and  his  means  to  carry  his  good  will  into 
effect  are  always  at  his  command. 

Jesus  taught  sinners,  enemies  to  God,  that  God  to  whom 
they  were  enemies,  loved  them.  This  he  demonstrated  by 
the  rain  and  sun  shine  which  was  communicated  to  the  evil 
and  the  good,  and  this  impartial  love  of  God,  he  urged  as  the 
perfect  pattern  for  our  imitation,  and  set  it  up  as  the  mark 
where  lies  the  prize  to  be  won  by  our  christian  vocation.  I 
say  unto  you  love  your  enemies,  pray  for  them  that  use  you 
spitefully  and  persecute  you,  that  ye  may  be  the  children  of 
your  Father  which  is  in  heaven  ;  that  is,  that  you  may  imi- 
tate him  in  your  conduct  and  moral  character.  Now,  sir, 
what  has  all  this  to  do  about  reconciling  God  to  man  ?  What 
has  it  to  do  about  appeasing  divine  wrath  ?  If  Jesus  taught 
the  doctrine  of  God's  love  to  sinneis,  and  our  doctrine  taught 
by  our  christian  doctors  of  God's  wrath  and  haired  towards 
sinners  be  true,  the  matter  is  settled  at  once.  These  doc- 
tors being  ministers  of  divine  truth,  Jesus  may  be  any  thing 
else,  but  he  cannot   be  an    apostle  and  high  priest  of  God. 

But  I  need  not  extend  this  article,  you  are  as  well  per- 
suaded of  the  erroneousness  of  these  doctrines  of  men  as  I 
am  ;  but  it  belongs  to  this  subject  to  take  a  general  view  of 
the  ministry  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles.  It  is  so  especially, 
because  this  view  shows  at  once  the  necessity  as  well  as  the 
nature  of  this  divine  ministry.  If  you  view  the  nature  of 
truth  as  you  have  heretofore  expressed  it,  and  as  I  am  confi- 
dent you  do,  you  cannot  reasonably  doubt  the  necessity  of 
having  it  manifested  to  the  world. 

It  was  necessary  then  for  God  to  endue  one  with  this  min- 
istry of  truth,  it  is  reasonable  that  others,  being  taught  by 
him  should  be  appointed  to  the  same  ministry;  but  you  will 
see  at  once  that  truth  could  not  be  preached  to  the  Jews 
without  moving  the  superstitious  scribes,  pharisees,  and  doc- 
tors of  the  law  against  it,  this  opposition  had  its  natural  ten- 
dency, and  terminated  in  the  death  of  the  divine  teacher; 
and  if  the  disciples  had  gone  on  and  preached  the  same  doc- 
trine, reason  would  suppose  that  they  would  all  have  been 
put  to  death  immediately,  and  the  work  of  reformation  would 
have  stopped.     Now,  sir,  if  I  am  able  to  reason  at  all,  it  was 


J  42  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

necessary  for  God  to  make  a  display  of  divine  power  in  vin- 
dicating truth,  which  would  place  it  on  ground  too  high  for 
all  the  superstition  of  the  world  to  remove.  You  contend 
that  the  voice  of  reason  should  be  heard.  What  does  it  say  ? 
It  says  that  God  produced  man  in  the  first  place  on  this  earth, 
in  a  different  way  from  that  by  which  man  is  now  multiplied. 
Reason  says,  there  was  a  necessity  for  this  ;  but  it  does  not 
say  that  the  means  of  procreation  now  do  not  answer  even  a 
better  purpose  than  to  have  man  multiplied  by  the  same 
means  by  which  he  came  first  to  exist.  The  same  reason 
will  contend  that  in  the  establishment  of  the  gospel  ministry 
in  the  world,  different  means  were  necessary  from  those 
which  are  successfully  employed  in  perpetuating  it. 

3d.  You  contend  that  the  christian  hope  of  a  future  happy 
existence,  is  not  necessary  to  our  present  happiness;  and 
that  there  is  nothing  more  disagioeable  in  the  thought  of  an 
eternal  cessation  of  existence,  than  there  is  in  the  thought 
of  reposing  ourselves'  in  quiet  sleep.  Notwithstanding  what 
you  say  about  non  existence,  all  your  play  on  woro^  makes 
no  difference  about  the  thing  talked  of.  Nor  do  I  see  that 
reason  in  your  observations  on  this  subject,  for  which  you 
contend.  You  very  well  know  that  to  cease  to  possess  an 
identity  of  being  and  of  intellect  is  what  we  mean  by  non-ex- 
istence, and  this  is  just  the  thing  for  which  you  argue.  Now 
when  we  contemplate  taking  refreshment  in  sleep,  it  is  in 
hope  of  awaking  again  in  a  better  condition  for  enjoying  our- 
selves and  others,  and  for  the  performance  of  our  duty. 
But  the  contemplation  of  passing  out  of  existence,  never  to 
have  another  thought  is  certainly  very  widely  different  as 
to  the  nature  of  the  subject,  from  the  former.  Now,  sir, 
why  should  not  these  different  subjects  produce  different 
sensations  in  the  mind  ?  And  wherein  one  is  entirely  re- 
pugnant to  the  other,  why  is  it  not  reasonable  that  the  con- 
templation or  them  should  be  attended  with  effects  in  the 
mind  as  repugnant  to  each  other  as  are  the  subjects  ?  If  it 
be  a  pleasure  to  a  parent  to  contemplate,  when  he  retires 
to  rest  with  his  family,  the  expectation  of  seeing  them  again 
in  the  morning,  all  refreshed  and  invigorated  anew  is  it  not 
reasonable  to  suppose  that  a  contemplation  exactly  reverse 
from  this  would  produce  mental  pain?  I  can  conceive,  with- 
out any  violation  of  my  reason  or  senses,  how  a  fond  mother 
can  take  satisfaction  in  nursing  her  babe  to  sleep,  knowing 
that  the  tender  being  needs  this  repose  ;  but  i  cannot  con- 
ceive  how  the  same  affectionate  mother  could   be  equally 


.     SERIES    OP    LETTERS.  143 

pleased  with  the  thought  that  her  child  would  never  wake 
again  in  time  or  in  eternity.  1  fee)  •  ratefnl  to  the  giver  of 
every  good  and  perfect  gift,  that  he  has  given  that  blessed 
hope  which  is  as  an  anchor  to  the  soul,  whereby  the  chris- 
tian in  his  dying  hour  is  enabled  to  take  a  short  farewell  of 
his  friends,  expresing  his  hope  of  meeting  them  soon  in  a 
Letter  world.  And  1  think  it  unreasonable,  even  in  the  ex- 
treme, to  suppose  that  a  rational  person  could,  in  a  similar 
situation,  feel  as  well  satisfied  with  an  expectation  of  an  ex- 
tinction of  being. 

You  fault  the  address  to  truth,  which  you  say  I  put  into 
the  mouth  of  your  argument,  but  this  you  do  without  the 
least  occasion,  nor  is  it  in  your  power,  sir,  to  show  that 
your  argument  does  not  afford  all  I  have  made  it  say-  You 
might,  or  rather  you  have  varied  the  language  a  little,  but 
the  sentiment  is  preserved  entire.  The  address  to  truth 
would,  as  before,  extoll  her  existence,  express  the  moct  ar- 
dent and  constant  love  for  her  divinity  and  finish  the  climax 
by  soaring  down  to  non-existence,  which  you  can  contem- 
plate with  as  much  satisfaction  as  you  could  an  eternal  ex- 
istence in  the  enjoyment  of  the  object  of  your  love  ! 

But  you  contend  that  truth  is  lovely,  and  if  your  doubts 
are  consistant  with  truth  you  shall  be  happy  to  be  confirmed 
in  them  ;  &c.  This  hypothesis,  sir,  is  too  large  to  suit  your 
own  views  ;  for  you  have  before  decided  a  choice  between 
the  doctrine  of  eternal  misery  and  that  of,  I  will  call  it,  an- 
nihilation for  this  is  its  true  meaning.  You  have  revolted 
at  the  thought  of  eternal  misery,  but  your  hypothesis  allows 
you  no  such  liberty.  Truth  is  lovely,  and  if  the  doctrine  of 
eternal  punishment,  with  ali  the  fire  and  brimstone  that  has 
ever  been  preached  by  the  most  zealous  advocates  of  tor- 
ment be  truth,  your  hypothesis  compels  you  to  embrace 
the  goddess,  and  contemplate  eternal  misery  with  the  same 
pleasure  that  you  do  non-existence,  or  with  the  same  you 
would  everlasting  felicity  did  you  believe  in  it  ! 

If  we  would  reason  well,  we  must  reason  from  what  we 
know.  We  know  that  man  is  capable  of  being  miserabie, 
he  is  capable  of  great  sufferings  ;  likewise  he  is  capable  of 
being  happy,  he  is  capable  of  great  enjoyments.  Now  to 
pretend  that  he  has  no  choice,  that  it  is  as  well  for  him  to 
be  miserable  as  to  be  happy,  as  well  for  him  not  to  exist  as 
to  exist,  is  the  reverse  of  reason. 

4th.  As  Jesus,  in  the  instructions  which  he  gave  to  his  dis- 
ciples, respecting  their  conduct  towards  their  enemies,  had 


14  i  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

no  design  reaching  to  the  laws  of  a  body  politic,  hut  only  to 
the  conduct  by  which  the  ministry  of  the  gospel  would  best 
succeed  in  its  early  beginning,  while  it  was  necessary  for  it 
to  be  persecuted,  by  which  we  are  now  favoured  with  it- 
evidences,  we  may  now  err  in  applying"  those  instructions 
differently  from  their  primary  design.  St.  Paul,  as  much  as 
any  of  the  disciples  of  Jesus,  submitted  himself  to  the  direc- 
tions of  non-resislence,  yet  he  insists  on  submission  to  the 
higher  powers,  because  they  were  the  ministers  of  God, 
even  revengers  to  execute  wrath  upon  them  that  do  evil. 

5  th.  With  a  confidence  rather  unusual,  you  challenge  me 
to  account  for  Jesus'  not  being  known  by  the  two  disciples 
while  he  walked  with  them  on  their  way  to  Emmaus  ;  you 
bring  a  comparison,  and  urge  the  subject  in  a  way  to  signify 
that  you  have  found  something  in  the  scripture  account  that 
"  refutes  itself."  You  might  have  considered  Mary's  case 
too  as  a  similar  one.  She  saw  Jesus  with  whom  she  had 
had  a  familiar  acquaintance,  but  she  thought  it  had  been  the 
gardner,  and  talked  with  him  without  knowing  him,  until, 
in  the  same  manner  as  he  used  to  address  her,  he  said  Maryy 
when  in  a  moment  she  knew  him.  So  the  two  brethren 
walked  on  the  way  with  Jesus,  and  attended  to  his  conver- 
sation, which  must  have  been  of  considerable  length,  yet 
knew  him  not  until  he  performed  an  office  at  table  in  which 
no  doubt,  he  appeared  as  he  had  done  many  times  before, 
which  led  them  to  know  him  at  once.  But  I  am  called  on 
to  tell  how  they  could  walk  and  discourse  with  him  and  not 
know  him.  Well,  sir,  do  you  not  understand  that  your  ques- 
tion is  asked  on  supposition  that  the  miracle  of  the  resurrec- 
tion was  a  fact,  and  on  the  supposition  that  Jesus  could  ap- 
pear and  disappear  to  persons  as  he  pleased  ?  We  are  in- 
formed that  when  the  two  brethren  knew  him,  "  he  vanish- 
ed out  of  their  sight."  On  the  supposition  then,  that  Jesus 
could  appear  and  disappear  at  pleasure,  is  it  at  all  difficult  to 
allow  that  he  could  appear  to  his  acquaintance  as  a  stranger, 
if  he  pleased  ? 

It  seems  to  me,  sir,  a  little  unaccountable  why  you  should 
take  hold  of  this  subject  with  so  much  seeming  earnestness. 
Is  it  possible  that  you  should  suppose  that  the  fate  of  this 
particular  should  have  any  power  on  our  general  subject? 
Without  the  least  concern  for  the  argument  in  which  I  am 
engaged,  I  might  allow  that  St.  Luke  was  wrongly  informed 
respecting  this  particular,  but  that  he  wrote  it  just  as  he  un- 
derstood the  matter.     And  what  would  follow  ?     Would  this 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  145 

prove  any  thing-  fal?e  on  which  Christianity  rest?.  I  am  un- 
ahie  to  see  how  it  affects  the  argument  one  way  or  the  oth- 
er. I  am  not  the  less  inclined  to  believe  the  account,  be- 
cause it  does  not  affect  the  truth  of  the  resurrection  ;  and  I 
should  think  that  as  this  ?tory  does  not  seem  at  all  necessary  in 
proof  of  that  fact,  it  would  be  considered  an  evidence  that 
the  writer  of  it  was  not  endeavouring  to  make  a  story  for 
such  a  purpose.  If  we  read  the  several  accounts  of  the 
ressurrection,  we  shall  perceive  that  the  writers  probably 
put  down  as  many  particulars  as  come  into  their  minds  at 
the  time  of  writing-,  without  thoughts  coming  into  their  minds 
how  the  truth  of  the  ressurrection  would  be  proved  by  the 
incidents  which  they  wrote.  There  is  no  design  of  this  sort 
id  what  they  have  written  that  we  can  see.  They  write  as 
if  they  knew  for  certainty  that  Jesus  rose  from  the  dead, 
and  as  if  the  matter  was  out  of  all  dispute.  They  discover 
no  concern  for  fear  the  account  they  were  giving  would  not 
be  believed.  There  is  not  one  instance  of  an  attempt  to 
guard  the  story  by  clearing  up  any  difficulty.  Would  impos- 
tors write  in  this  way  ?  It  is  not  believed  that  there  was  ev- 
er the  instance.  Imposture  is  like  a  thief  who  starts  at  his 
own  shadow,  and  discovers  gulit  by  endeavouring  to  hide  it. 
But  truth  having  no  concern  of  this  sort,  discovers  none. — 
And  this  is  in  all  respects  the  apparent  character  of  the  four 
gospels. 

6th.  Your  criticism  on  my  argument  respecting  the  evi- 
dences of  the  resurrection  I  shall  now  endeavour  to  show  to 
be  incorrect. 

You  criticise  as  follows  ;  "  The  apostles  could  not  have 
been  convinced  of  the  fact  of  the  resurrection  by  any  evi- 
dence short  of  the  fact  itself  2d.  If  the  fact  did  exist  there 
is  no  evidence  which  can  counterbalance  it.  Ergo,  as  the 
apostles  were  convinced  of  the  truth,  the  fact  did  exist.  This 
is  pretty  much  like  saying,  if  the  fact  were  true  it  could  not 
have  been  false  !" 

The  first  member  of  your  criticism  supposes  that  I  contend 
that  the  apostles  had  no  evidence  of  the  resurrection  but  the 
fact  itself.  The  second  member  of  your  criticism  supposes 
that  I  contend  the  fact  of  the  resurrection  could  not  exist 
without  proving  itself  to  the  apostles  in  such  a  way  that  no 
evidence  could  counterbalance  it.  Now  in  both  of  these 
you  are  under  a  mistake,  I  never  urged  the  fact  of  the  re- 
surrection as  evidence  of  itself  to  the  apostles.  1  never  pre- 
tended that  they  saw  him  rise.     We  have  so  account  that 


146  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

any  body  saw  this  act  performed.  If  the  apostles  had  stood 
by  the  sepulchre  and  had  seen  the  body  of  Jesus  rise  up  and 
walk  out  of  the  house  of  death,  then  their  evidences  of  his 
resurrection  would  have  been  the  fact  itself;  but  this  was 
not  the  case,  nor  did  I  use  any  intimations  of  this  nature. 
So  the  first  member  of  your  criticism  is  an  error  of  yours. 
2dly.  If  Jesus  had  rose  from  the  dead  and  ascended  into 
heaven,  and  never  had  given  any  proofs  of  this  to  any  one, 
would  the  fact  of  his  having-  risen  be  any  evidence  of  itself 
to  any  person  ?  It  surely  would  not.  Nor  have  I  suggested 
any  thing  which  intimates  that  the  resurrection  could  not 
have  been  true  without  proving  itself  to  be  so  to  the  apostles. 
What  seems  a  little  remarkable  respecting  this  subject,  is, 
vou  profess  to  care  for  nothing  but  simple  truth,  and  yet  you 
seem  to  study  how  to  avoid  it,  as  the  above  criticism  seems 
to  evince.  I  say  seems  to  evince,  for  I  am  not  prepared  to 
accuse  you.of  such  a  fault — I  would  charitably  believe  that 
you  thought  your  criticism  would  hit  something  or  another 
nearly  about  right,  without  understanding  what  the  amount 
of  it  is. 

After  having  laboured,  in  a  lengthy  manner,  as  you  ac- 
knowledge, to  prove  that  the  evidences  which  proved  to  the 
apostles  the  truth  of  the  resurrection  could  not  be  counter- 
balanced, you  must  reasonably  suppose  that  I  feel  a  little 
disappointed  that  you  should  condescend  to  pay  no  other  at- 
t€  ntion  to  my  reasoning  than  the  above  criticism.  If  I  did  not 
make  my  argument,clear  why  should  you  neglect  to  point  out 
to  me  wherein  it  was  wanting?  Why  should  I  not  expect 
to  have  my  errors  corrected,  as  well  as  to  be  called  on  to 
correct  my  brothers  ?  Should  not  these  kind  offices  be  recip- 
rocal ?  If  you  conduct  in  this  way,  I  shall  certainly  grow 
vain,  and  boast  of  doing  more  for  you,  than  you  do  for  me. 

Having  noticed  in  a  brief  manner,  the  several  particulars 
which  were  proposed  on  my  iirst  page,  I  will  cccupy  a  few 
more  with  some  observations  on  the  evidences  which  we  are 
favoured  with,  on  which  to  buiiu  our  belief  in  the  resurrec- 
tion of  Jesus. 

I  have  in  one  or  two  instances  referred  you  to  Paley,who 
has,  with  abilities  and  learning  suited  to  such  a  task,  brought 
forward  the  authorities  on  which  the  credibility  of  the  gos- 
pels rests.  I  have  set  down  his  eleven  propositions  respect- 
ing the  scriptures,  and  I  humbly  request  you  to  examine  the, 
proof  which  he  has  brought  to  support  them.  If  he  has 
fairly  supported  all  these- propositions,  a3  I  humbl}'  conceive 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  M7 

be  has,  will  you  show  why  the  scriptures  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament are  not  worthy  to  be  credited  by  us  ? 

I  am  loaih  to  attempt  to  present  the  evidences  on  which 
I  conceive  our  faith  rests,  because  in  the  first  place  they  are 
vastly  numerous  ;  2ndly.  I  do  not  believe  that  I  am  capable 
of  doing  that  justice  to  the  subject  which  it  justly  claims  j 
and  3dly.  Paley  has  done  it  by  the  assistance  of  Dr.  Lard- 
ner's works,  to  so  great  an  extent,  that  it  renders  unnecessa- 
ry any  attempt  of  mine. 

However,  as  there  seems  a  particular  sort  of  pleasure  it  it, 
I  will  here  make  a  little  addition  to  what  I  quoted  in  my  for- 
mer communication,  and  notice,  that,  following  the  passage 
from  the  epistle  of  Barnabas,  Paley  mentions  an  epistle  writ- 
ten by  Clement,  bishop  of  Rome,*  another  of  St.  Paul's  fel- 
low labourers.  "  This  epistle  is  spoken  of  by  the  ancients 
as  aa  epistle  acknowledged  by  all ;  and  as  IrenaL-us  well  re- 
presents its  value,"  4i  written  by  Clement,  who  had  seen 
the  blessed  apostles  and  conversed  with  them,  who  hud  the 
preaching  of  the  apostles  still  sounding  in  his  ears,  and  their 
traditions  before  his  eyes."  In  this  epistle  of  Clement,  he 
quotes  Mat.  v.  7,  xviii.  6.  Next  to  Clement,  Paley  notices 
Hermes  who  is  mentioned  by  St.  Paul,  Rom.  xvi.  14,  in  a  cat- 
alogue of  Roman  christians.  Hermes  wrote  a  work  called 
the  Shepherd  or  Pastor  of  Hcrmes.\  Says  our  author,  "  Its 
antiquity  is  incontestible  from  the  quotations  of  it  in  Irenaeus, 
A.  D.  170,  Clement  of  Alexandria,  A.  D.  191,  Tcrtullian, 
A.  D.  200,  Origen,  A.  D.  230."  In  the  epistle  there  are  al- 
lusions to  St.  Matthew's,  St.  Luke's,  and  St.  John's  gospels. 

Next  to  Hermes  our  author  mentions  Ignatius,  who  he- 
came  bishop  of  Antioch,  about  thirty -seven  years  after  the 
ascension  of  Christ;  and  was  without  doubt  personally  ac- 
quainted with  the  apostles.  Epistles  of  Ignatius  are  referred 
to  by  Polycarp  his  contemporary.  Passages,  found  in  the 
epistles  now  extant  under  his  name,  are  quoted  by  Irenaeus, 
A.  D.  178,  by  Origen,  A.  D.  130.  lu  these  epistles  there 
are  various  undoubted  allusions  to  the  gospels  of  St.  Matthew 
and  St.  John.  Of  these  allusions  the  following  are  clear 
specimens  :  u  Christ  wa9  baptised  of  John,  that  all  righteous- 
ness might  be  fulfilled  by  him."  u  Be  ye  wise  as  serpents  in 
all  things,  and  harmless  as  doves."'"' 

*  Paley's  Evidences,  p.  107.  Referred  to  Dr.  Lardner's  Creed, 
vol.  1,  p.  62,  et  seq. 

t  Paley's  Evidences,  p.  1 10.     Lardner's  Creed,  vol.  1,  p.  111. 


i48  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

"  Yet  the  spirit  is  not  deceived,  being  from  Cod  ;  for  it 
knows  whence  it  comes,  and  whether  it  goes." 

"  He  (Christ)  is  the  door  of  the  Father,  by  which  en- 
ters io  Abraham  andlsancand  Jacob,  and  the  apostles  and 
the  church/1  Ignatius  speaks  of  St  Paul  in  terms  of  high 
respect,  and  quotes  his  epistles  to  the  Ephesians  by  name. 

Next  to  Ignatius,  our  author  mentions  Polycaiip  who  had 
been  taught  by  the  apostles;  had  conversed  with  many  who 
had  seen  Christ,  was  also,  by  the  apostles  appointed  bishop 
of  Smyrna.  This  testimony  concerning  Polycarp  is  given  by 
Irenacus,  who  in  his  youth  had  seen  him.  st  I  can  tell  the 
place,"  saith  Irenaenus,  u  in  which  the  blessed  Polycarp  sat 
and  taught,  and  his  going  out  and  coming  in,  and  the  manner  of 
his  life,  and  the  form  of  his  person,  and  the  discourses  he 
made  to  the  people,  and  how  he  related  his  conversation 
with  John  and  others  who  had  seen  the  Lord,  and  how  he 
related  their  sayings,  and  what  he  had  heard  concerning  the 
Lord,  both  concerning  his  miracles  and  his  doctrine,  as  he 
Fiad  received  them  from  the  eye  witness  of  the  word  of  life  : 
all  which  Polycarp  related  agreeably  to  the  scriptures." 

In  one  short  letter  of  Polycarp's,  there  are  near  forty 
clear  allusions  to  books  of  the  New  Testament :  which  is 
?trong  evidence  of  the  respect  which  christians  of  that  age 
bear  for  these  books,  and  positive  evidence  that  the  gospel 
.had  been  written  before  this  epistle. 

Pafias,  a  hearer  of  John,  and  companion  of  Polycarp,  as 
frenaeus  attests,  and  of  that  age,  as  all  agree,  expressly  as- 
cribes the  respective  gospels  to  Matthew  and  Mark,  in  a 
passage  quoted  by  Eusebius.  He  informs  us  that  Mark  col- 
lected his  gospel  from  Peter's  preaching,  and  that  Matthew 
wrote  his  gospel  in  Hebrew.  This  authority  fully  shows 
that  the  gospels  bore  these  names  at  this  early  period. 

The  authors  which  are  here  mentioned,  all  lived  in  the 
days  of  the  apostles,  that  is,  when  the  apostles  were  aged  men, 
these  were  their  pupils  in  the  gospel,  and  their  epistles 
which  have  reference  to  the  gospels  are  very  justly  used  to 
prove  that  the  gospels  were  written  by  the  men  whose 
names  they  bear.  From  these  most  early  authors,  Paley 
goes  on,  and  brings  down,  by  regular  succession,  the  chris- 
tian authors,  until  he  comes  into  the  fourth  century,  when 
they  are  vastly  numerous. 

By  the  foregoing  authority,  together  with  an  innumerable 
multitude  of  corroborating  circumstances,  we  are  led  to  en- 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  149 

tertain  no  doubts  but  that  the  gospels  of  Matthew  and  John 
were  written  by  these  eye  witnesses  of  the  things  which 
they  relate ;  and  that  the  gospel  of  Luke  was  written  by  a 
person  of  this  name,  who  had  his  information  from  undoubt- 
ed testimony  of  the  apostles  ;  and  that  Mark  wrote  his  gos- 
pel from  St.  Peter's  mouth,  and  that  this  gospel  may  be 
called  the  gospel  of  Peter. 

Those  eye  witnesses  then  wrote  what  they  saw,  and  if 
they  were  honest  men  they  wrote  the  truth. 

We,  sir,  do  certainly  know  as  well  as  we  know  any  thing 
which  ancient  history  records,  that  the  testimony  of  the  mir- 
acles and  resurrection  of  Jesus  was  believed  in' the  age  to 
which  these  things  are  referred,  and  that  this  testimony  was 
sealed  by  the  sufferings  and  death  of  vast  multitudes  of  be- 
lievers. 

It  should  be  noticed,  that  according  to  all  accounts  which 
have  come  to  us,  there  were  no  worldly  motives  of  any  sort 
by  which  the  propagators  of  the  gospel  were  induced  to  la- 
bour in  this  cause.  "But  on  the  contrary,  every  earthly  con- 
sideration was  direct  against  them  ;  and  furthermore  let  us 
remember,  that  the  whole  hierarchy  of  the  Jews  and  all  the 
superstition  of  the  Gentiles  were  in  arms  against  this  religion, 
as  I  have  before  observed,  nearly  300  years. 

Hoping,  dear  brother,  that  these  hasty  remarks  will  be 
favourably  received,  and  duly  considered.     I  remain, 

Yours,  &c.  H.  BALLOU. 


EXTRACTS  No.  IX. 

[As  the  objector  here  begins  to  give  up  his  ground,  his  letters  from 
this  place  will  be  given  nearly  entire.  He  commences  this  number 
as  follows,  viz.] 

"Dear  sir  and  brother — Your  reply  to  my  seventh  number 
has  been  received,  and  hereby  duly  acknowledged.  I  have 
just  given  it  a  second  reading,  with  peculiar  care  and  atten- 
tion ;  and  I  must  add,  generally  speaking,  with  peculiar  sat- 
isfaction too  ;  for  as  it  has  tended  in  some  degree  to  revive 
my  almost  extinguished  faith  in  divine  revelation,  so  it  has 
in  the  same  ratio  served  to  obliterate,  in  some  degree,  those 
doubts  which  seemed  to  be  rising  mountains  high,  in  my  ap- 
prehension, and  portended  ere  long  to  overturn  all  my  for- 
mer faith. 

u  There  are  some  of  my  objections, however,  which  seem 
not  yet  to  have  been  fully  met  on  their  proper  srround,  and 
13~* 


150  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

of  course  not  fully  removed  ;  and  I  must  therefore  be  yet 
indulged  with  a  few  remarks. 

"  1st.  Notwithstanding  all  the  learning  of  the  Greeks  and 
Romans,  in  the  days  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles,  yet,  as  you 
very  justly  insinuate,!  am  inclined  to  believe  there  never  was 
a  time  in  which  u  the  world  of  human  kind,  both  Jews  and 
Gentiles,  was  more  deeply  involved  in  the  darkness  aud  stu- 
pidity of  superstition  than  when  the  Messiah  (i.  e.  Jesus)  er£ 
tered  on  his  public  ministry."  And  notwithstanding  your 
argument  drawn  from  superstition,  is  admitted  as  good,  and 
weighty,  as  far  as  it  goes  ;  yet,  as  it  is  conceived,  it  does 
not  fully  come  to  the  point.     For, 

"  In  the  grossest  ages  of  superstition  it  is  reasonable  to 
suppose  that  there  are  always  some  who  entertain  serious 
doubts  and  scruples  in  regard  to  the  propriety  of  many  of 
the  superstitous  notions  of  their  leaders.  These  will  be 
more  easily  wrought  upon.  And  although  they  may  be  di- 
rected by  various  circumstances  to  fix  the  mind  upon  some- 
thing much  better  in  point  of  moral  principle,  yet  how  far 
this  would  prevent  them  from  connecting  many  of  the  super- 
stitious notions  of  the  age  with  those  moral  principles,  only 
giving  them  a  different  dress,  I  am  not  able  to  say  ;  neither 
do  I  see  how  the  superstition  of  the  Jews  and  Gentiles, 
generally,  would  be  likely  to  prevent  a  thing  of  that  kind. — 
It  is  the  suspected  superstition  of  the  apostles  and  primative 
christians  and  not  the  superstition  of  their  opposers,  to 
which  the  proposition  alludes.  Men,  I  conceive,  may  be 
honest,  and  yet  superstitious  ;  they  may  also  give  up  one 
superstition,  by  being  convinced  of  its  error,  and  yet  anoth- 
er will  gradually  grow  in  its  stead.  I  am  sensible,  however, 
that  this  argument  will  better  apply  to  those  who  were  con- 
verted to  Christianity  after  the  days  of  the  apostles,  when  it 
is  agreed  that  miracles  had  ceased,  than  it  will  to  the  apos- 
tles themselves.     But, 

"  From  what  you  have  written,  together  with  my  further 
investigation  of  this  subject,  I  cannot  but  perceive  that  this 
argument,  even  on  its  proper  ground,  does  not  contain  all 
that  force  which,  at  first  view,  I  thought  it  might  :  because, 
1st,  It  must  apply  to  the  apostles,  or  else,  as  it  respects 
the  main  question,  it  does  not  seem  to  have  any  real  bear- 
ing on  the  subject  ;  and  2d!y,  The  change  of  the  appostles 
appears  to  have  been  too  sudden, and  too  extraordinary ,to  be 
accounted  for  in  this  way.  That  superstitions,however,have 
arisen,  even  ia  the  christian  church,  you  do  not  undertake 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  151 

to  deny  ;  but  seem  rather  to  admit ;  and  it  was  on  this  fact 
that  the  first  proposition  was  founded  ;  but  I  perceive  there 
is  a  difficulty  in  carrying  this  objection  back  to  the  apostles  ; 
for  then  the  doctrine  was  new,  and  without  precedent  ;  and 
(unless  the  miracles  on  which  it  is  said  to  have  been  found- 
ed were  real)  without  any  certain  prospect  of  success.  Al- 
hough  therefore  the  religion  of  the  despised  Galatians  (for 
uch  were  the  christians  called  by  the  Romans)  was  consid- 
ed  by  their  persecutors,  to  be  nothing  more  than  a  gross, 
and  even  impious  superstition,  yet  no  one  can  expect  suc- 
cesfully  to  account  u  in  a  rational  way,'-  for  the  facts,  wheth- 
er real  or  supposed,  on  which  thai  supposed  superstition  is 
said  to  have  been  founded.  Hence  (he  doubts  growing  out 
of  my  first  proposition  seem  to  be  rendered  equally,  if  net 
more  doubtful  than  the  reality  of  that  truth,  the  "evidence  of 
which  this  objection  was  supposed  in  some  degree  to  coun- 
terbalance. 

M  2d.  The  truth  of  my  second  proposition,  viz.  That  a 
part  of  mankind  at  least  have  been  and  still  are  believing  in 
miracles  and  revelations  which  are  spurious,  you  seem  not- 
disposed  to  deny  ;  but  yet,  at  the  same  time  you  tiiink  you 
are  "  under  no  obligation  to  admit  this  fact  as  any  evidence 
against  Christianity/'  That  a  spurious  or  pretended  mira- 
cle does  not  invalidate  a  real  one 'I  admit  ;  yet  if  a  spurious 
miracle  may  obtain  credit,  and  be  in  fact  believed,  it  raises  a 
query  whether  there  have  ever  been  any  others  but  spuri- 
ous. Your  argument  respecting  ;  counterfeit  money'  ir 
admitted  good  in  relation  to  that  subject,  but  whether  it  will 
apply  with  equal  weight  to  the  subject  of  miracles  may  ad- 
mit of  a  doubt.  I  do  not  see  how  the  pretended  miracles  of 
the  Shakers  are  at  all  '  dependent'  on  the  miracles  of  Jesus 
for  their  'imposition.' 

"  I  meant  nothing  more  by  the  miracles  of  Mahomet  than 
his  pretended  L  correspondence  with  the  angel  Gabriel,' 
which  I  considered,  if  true,  miraculous  ;  as  1  conceive  every 
revelation  must  be  let  it  be  communicated  how  it  will. 

u  I  have  nothing  to  object  to  the  picture  which  you  have 
given  of  the  life  and  religion  of  Mahomet  ;  and  as  to  what  I 
have  said  in  regard  to  the  conversion  and  influence  of  Con- 
stantino, in  giving  a  particular  tone  to  the  christian  religion,, 
you  are  not  disposed  to  disagree  with  me  :  and  at  the  same 
time  you  are  '  b}-  no  means  certain  that  a  proper  attention 
to  the  pretended  miracles  of  the  Shakers  might  not  issue  in 
assigning  a  natural  cause  for  them.'     Of  all  this  I  have   no 


].32  SERIES    OF    LETTER?. 

doubt.  But,  that  these  miracles  are  believed  by  the  Shak- 
er?, you  do  not  undertake  to  deny  ;  nor  that  their  religion, 
their  faith  in  Ann,  as  being-  Christ  in  his  second  coming,  and 
that  their  present  mode  of  worship  are  all  predicated  upon 
them.  They  do  not  deny  the  miracles  of  Christ  and  his  a- 
postles  any  more  than  christians  in  general  deny  the  mira- 
cles of  Moses  and  the  prophets  ;  but  appeal  to  theirs,  as  be- 
ing- equally  of  divine  origin,  and  thereby  clothing  their  reli- 
gion with  the  same  divine  authority.  Now,  unless  these 
things  can  be  accounted  for  c  in  a  rational  way,'  which  you 
seem  to  think  may  be  the  case,  though  you  do  not  attempt  it, 
they  certainly  raise  a  query  in  the  mind  at  least  whether  the 
miracles  recorded  in  scripture  rests  upon  any  better  founda- 
tion. 

"  If  a  thing  is  absolutely  known  or  believed  to  be  mirac- 
ulous, it  is  miraculous  ;  (at  least  to  those  who  thus  believe) 
and  whether  any  thing  can  be  justly  argued  from  the  infe- 
riority or  superiority  of  a  miracle,  I  know  not.  In  the  rais- 
ing of  Lazarus,  it  is  true,  though  the  effect  was  the  same, 
we  discover  as  great  a  miracle,  and  perhaps  greater,  than 
in  the  raising  of  a  son  of  the  Shunamite  by  Elisha  the 
prophet  ;  2  Kings  iv.  34,  35,  but  the  miracle  of  the  resur- 
rection of  Jesus  can  hardly  be  said  to  have  been  wrought 
either  by  Jesus  or  by  his  apostles,  and  therefore  that  was 
not  particularly  refered  to  in  the  comparison  of  miracles  ; 
neither  do  I  know  as  the  comparison,  in  any  sense,  has  much 
weight.  Whether  Lazarus  ever  died  again  or  not  we  are 
not  informed  :  neither  do  I  recollect  of  ever  hearing  an 
opinion  on  the  subject  ;  but,  if  he  died,  it  seems  that  his 
resurrection  must  have  been^verv  different  from  the  resur- 


ai- 


rection  of  Jesus  ;  i.  e.  to  an  immortal  state,  so  that  he 
eth  no  more.' 

tt  You  admit,  if  I  understood  you,  that  the  testimony  of 
the  apostles,  concerning  the  resurrection  of  Jesus,  had  it 
not  been  accompanied  with  plain  and  astonishing  miracles  in 
the  open  day,  and  before  the  surrounding  multitudes,  who 
had  ocular  demonstration  of  their  truth,would  have  been  en- 
titled to  no  more  credit  than  the  testimony  of  Mrs.  A. , 

respecting  her  conversation  with  her  deceased  husband.  For 
although  it  might  have  been  true,  and  we  could  have  no 
good  reason  io  doubt  the  sincerity  or  belief  of  the  witnesses, 
yet,  after  all,  its  truth  would  solely  rest  on  their  mere  ipse 
dixit,  which  would  not  be  sufficient  to  establish  so  important 
a  truth  in   the  world.     Hence,  as  you  very  justly  observe,. 


.SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  153 

1  the  declaration  of  the  apostles  of  the  resurrection  of  Je- 
sus, until  it  was  accompanied  with  power  from  on  high,  was 
never  even  communicated  to  the  public,  or  ordered  to  be 
communicated.' 

"  In  this  manner  I  understood  jour  reasoning,  and  I  think 
f  understand  you  correctly  ;  and  oil  this  appears  to  be  very 
candid  ;  it  is  acknowledging  all  I  would  wish  you  to  acknowl- 
edge on  this  subject.  But  here  comes  the  difficulty.  Mira- 
cles in  process  of  time  cease  ;  and  now  people  must  believe, 
if  they  believe  at  a!!,  without  the  testimony's  being  (  accom- 
panied with  power  from  on  high.1  And  how  can  we  believe 
)';  the  miracles  said  to  have  been  wrought  by  the  apostles, 
without  the  testimony'-  being  accompanied  by  miracles  any 
more  than  they  could  at  first  believe  in  the  miracles  of  the 
resurrection  of  Je<us  without  the  testimony's  being  accom- 
panied by  miracles  ?  You  have  already  anticipated  this  ob- 
jection, and  have  endeavoured  to  answer  it  by  arguing  that 
'perpetual  miracles  would,  if  as  powerful  as  they  were  at 
first,  preclude  the  exercise  of  our  reasoning  faculties  and 
the  necessity  of  investigation,  which  is  one  of  the  most  ra- 
tional enjoyments  of  which  we  are  capable.'  Although  this 
argument,  it  is  confessed,  has  considerable  weight,  yet  it 
does  not  seem  wholly  to  remove  the  difficulty.  1  feci  very 
much  like  those  Jews  who  proposed  the  question  to  Jesus  ; 
1  how  long  dost  thou  make  us  to  doubt  ?  If  thcu  be  the 
Christ  tell  us  plainly.'  I  am  not  satisfied  that  the  evidence 
of  the  truth  of  the  resurrection  is  as  great,  at  this  day, 
whatever  it  was  then,  as  it  could  have  been.  If  Jesus  had 
remained  on  the  earth  till  this  time,  or  if  he  had  appeared 
to  every  generation  since,  it  appears  to  me  the  evidence 
would  have  been  much  greater  ;  and  yet  not  so  great  as  to 
•  preclude  the  exercise  of  our  reasoning  faculties.' 

M  In  your  statement  respecting  the  controversy  between 
Unitarians  and  Trinitarians,  it  appears  to  me  you  have  left 
out  some  very  important  circumstances  which  ought  to 
have  been  taken  into  the  account  to  have  made  it  any  thing 
near  a  parallel.  You  seem  to  have  forgotten  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  Jews  by  the  Romans  about  the  time  the  books  of 
the  New  Testament  are  said  to  have  been  written  ;  during 
which  calamity,  as  the  history  of  those  times  inform  us, 
about  f>ne  miiton  one  hundred  thousand  Jews  were  cutoff, 
and  among  whom,  it  is  more  than  probable,  all  their  leaders, 
who  were  then  concerned  in  the  death  of  Jesus,  were  in- 
cluded ;  and  only  about  ninety -seven  thousand,  not  a  tenth 


154  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

part,  were  taken  prisoners.  The  Jews  in  the  adjacent 
countries,  however,  probably  are  not  taken  into  this  account, 
but  they  were  all  equally  subdued  to  the  Romans.  And  if 
the  power  of  the  Jews  were  so  limited  at  the  crucifixion  of 
Jesu?  that  they  could  not  lawfully  put  a  man  to  death  with- 
out liberty  from  the  Roman  governor  what  must  we  suppose 
was  their  power  after  the  destruction  of  their  city  and  tem^ 
pie.  On  a  review  of  the  subject,  therefore,  I  think  you  will 
perceive  that  your  case,  however  plausibly  stated,  falls  very 
far  short  of  being  a  parallel.  We  may  well  suppose,  I  think, 
that  the  Jews  were  so  humbled  by  the  Romans,  that,  1st. 
thej'  had  not  the  power ;  and,  2diy.  they  might  not  under 
these  circumstances  be  inclined  any  longer  to  persecute  and 
put  to  death  the  christians.  And  this  was  the  only  way  it 
seems,  at  that  day,  that  either  Jews  or  Gentiles  thought  of 
putting  down  what  they  considered  heresy  or  superstition. 
I  consider  therefore  the  destruction  of  the  Jews  as  giving  a 
very  favourable  opportunity  to  get  up  a  new  system  of  reli- 
gion, partly  or  wholly  based  on  theirs,  but  a  little  removed 
from  it,  so  as  to  neglect  the  use  of  sacrifices,  which,  if  1  mis- 
take not,  according  to  the  Jewish  traditions,  could  only  be 
ciTered  at  Jerusalem.  And  the  long  lapse  of  time,  before 
the  dogmas  of  this  new  Beet  was  attempted  to  be  refuted  by- 
argument  gave  an  opportunity  to  involve  the  supposed  facts 
on  whicii  the  christian  religion  is  predicated  in  such  obscu- 
rity, that  it  stands  new  in  no  danger  of  refutation  from  that 
source.  Seme  m^y  be  made  to  doubt,  others  to  disbelieve, 
but  nevertheless  no  one  can  prove  it  fa 

"  If  it  be  proved  true,  however,  it  must  be  proved  from 
the  record  which  we  have;  fori  know  of  nothing  which 
can  now  add  much  weight  to  that  testimony,  unless  it  be  the 
fulfilment  of  some  striking  prophecies  which  yet  remain  to 
be  fulfilled,  or  else  the  return  of  miraclous  powers  and  a 
revelation  in  further  confirmation  of  what  we  already 
have.  And  if  what  we  have  be  true,  it  seems  we  have  a 
right  to  expect,  ere  long,  something  of  the  kind.  The  ten 
last  chapters  of  the  prophecy  of  Ezekiel,  I  think  no  one  will 
pretend  has  ever  bees  fulfilled,  as  yet;  and  when  fulfilled, 
the  events  wiii  prove  the  divine  inspiration  of  that  prophe- 
cy. But  if  it  should  never  be  fulfilled,  or  its  fulfilment  be 
delayed  till  the  Jews  every  where  should  give  up  all  hope 
and  expectation  of  any  thing  of  this  kind  ;  and  should,  through 
unbelief,  neglect  their  present  customs,  as  many  of  them 
,dy  have  done,  by  intermarrying  with  other  nations,  and 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  I  53 

thereby  should  become  both  lost  to  themselves  and  to  the 
world,  which  would  be  the  same  as  though  they  were  extinct, 
I  apprehend  that  no  confidence  would  be  placed  in  that  part 
of  the  prophecy  after  such  a  period.  In  like  manner  the 
fulfilment  or  the  non-fulfilment  of  the  following  words  wiil 
have  a  similar  effect.  '  This  same  Jesus,  which  is  taken  up 
from  you  into  heaven,  shall  so  come  in  tike  manner  as  ye 
have  seen  him  go  into  heaven.'  Some  pretend  to  say  that 
even  this  prophecy  has  been  already  fulfilled  ;  but  we  have 
no  evidence  of  it,  and  1  think  we  may  say  the  prophecy  in 
Ezekiel,  above  mentioned,  has  been  fulfilled,  with  as  much 
propriety.     But  this  is  rather  off  the  point. 

"Id  regard  to  the  death  of  Stephen,  notwithstanding  his 
trial  seems  to  have  been  by  the  council,  yet  the  manner  of 
his  death,  as  stated,  seems  to  have  boen  rather  turbulent 
tharvotherwise.  '  When  they  heard  these  things  they  were 
cut  to  the  heart,  and  they  (whether  the  council,  or  the  spec- 
tators I  cannot  say)  gnashed  on  him  with  their  teeth — then 
they  cried  out  with  a  loud  voice,  and  stopped  their  ears,  and 
ran  upon  him  with  one  accord,  and  cast  him  out  of  the  city 
and  stonned  him.*  Such  proceedings  at  this  day,  as  this  ap- 
pears to  have  been,  we  should  be  inclined  to  call  a  mob,  let 
it  bear  what  other  appellation  it  may. 

M  That  the  first  martyrs,  however,  did,  from  some  circum- 
stance or  other,believe  in  the  resurrection  of  Jesus, on  which 
all  their  hope  seems  to  have  been  predicated,  I  think  cannot 
admit  of  a  rational  doubt.  For  to  suppose  otherwise,  sup- 
poses such  madness  and  folly  in  these  unfortunate  men,  who 
suffered  every  tiling  which  could  be  indicted  upon  them 
rather  than  to  give  up  their  testimony  ;  that  it  seem^noth- 
ing  can- be  a  parallel,  unless  it  be  the  madness  and  folly  of 
such  unreasonable  doubts.*  And  this  seems  to  be  aii  for 
which  you  contend,  as  it  respects  the  preset  ^erv  ;  be- 
cause you  seem  to  think  the  first  believers  in  this  aii-impor- 
t.int  truth  could  not  have  believed  by  any  evidence  which 
could  have  existed  had  it  not  been  for  the  truth  of  the  fact 
believed  in.  Now  here  is  the  mistake,  as  I  conceive,  if 
there  be  any  ;  i.  e.  in  supposing  that  the  apostles  and  primi- 
tive christians  could  not  believe  short  of  such  indubitable 
evidence.  Only  suppose  the  resurrection  to  have  been  ac- 
tually believed,  by  any  evidence,  or  any  circumstance  what- 

*  I  have  here  expressed  my.=elf  in  strong  terms,  with  a  view  to 
check  my  doubts  and  prevent  their  running  wild. 


15(5  SERIES    OF   LETTERS. 

ever,  no  matter- what,  for  it  makes  no  difference  in  this  ar- 
gument, and  the  report  would  naturally  be  like  all  other  re- 
ports of  such  an  extraordinary  nature.  Both  zeal  and  im- 
agination would  be  enlisted  on  the  side  of  its  truth.  Extra- 
ordinary discourses  would  be  put  into  the  mouths  of  the  mar- 
tyrs, after  they  were  dead,  as  well  as  extraordinary  deeds 
into  their  hands  ;  and  altho'  contradicted  ever  so  many  times 
by  their  enemies  and  persecutors,  yet  the  contradictions 
would  never  so  out  run  the  report  but  that  many  would  still 
believe.  When  much  strength  of  testimony  had  been  thus 
added,  by  verbal  reports,  during  twenty  or  thirty  years,  let 
a  few  men  undertake  to  paint  up  real  histories  and  letters  in 
the  name  of  the  first  disciples,  and  let  these  be  kept  in 
the  hands  of  those  who  are  strong-  in  the  faith,  and  let  them 
be  read  for  a  long  time,  only  in  their  own  assemblies  or 
churches  although  they  might  contain  something  of  which 
they  had  not  before  heard,  this  is  only  what  would  be  nat- 
ural for  them  to  expect,  and  as  it  contained  the  main  thing 
which  was  the  object  of  faith,  and  those  other  things,  if 
true,  went  to  establish  their  faith  still  more,  who  would  be 
likely  to  call  the  truth  of  such  writings  in  quesiion  ?  Not 
those  who  believe  in  the  main  question  certainly.  They 
would  be  a  thousand  times  more  likely  to  pass  over  in  si- 
lence things  of  which  they  had  some  scruples,  for  the  sake 
of  the  main  question,  then  they  would  be  to  endanger  the 
truth  of  the  main  question,  as  they  might  think  they  should, 
by  criticising  on  mere  circumstantial  things.  I  am  not  now 
speaking  of  the  apostles,  whom  I  have  considered  honest 
men  ;  yet  I  should  suppose  that  even  these  men  might  have 
much  good  at  heart,  although  they  should  conduct  exactly 
in  the  way  which  I  have  suggested.  And  how  little  time 
would  it  require  to  put  this  matter  beyond  all  possible  refu- 
tation ?  Not  so  long,  I  conceive,  as  did  elapse  before  that 
work  was  attempted  by  Celsus. 

"  You  will  see  by  this,  sir,  in  what  light  my  argument 
views  the  apostles.  It  does  not  suppose  '  that  the  apostles 
would  enforce  their  moral  doctrine  with  their  pretentions  to 
miraculous  powers,'  although  they  might  with  the  'testimony 
of  the  resurrection  of  Jesus,1  but  it  supposes  that  their  suc- 
cessors might  contend  that  the  apostles  worked  miracies, 
and  many  of  them  might  believe  that  they  did,  just  as  the 
apostles  believed  in  the  resurrection,  when  no  such  thing 
»s  the  resurrection  or  the  miracles  of  the  apostles  ever  ex- 
isted in  fact.     This  is  what  the  argument  supposes,  and  it  is 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  157 

wholly  predicated  on  the  possibility  of  the  apostles'  being 
made  to  believe,  some  how  or  other,  I  do  not  pretend  to  say 
how,  that  Jesus  had  risen  from  the  dead  when  no  such  thing 
had  taken  place.  But,  only  believe  in  the  resurrection,  and 
there  is  no  difficulty  in  believing  in  the  miracles  of  Jesus  or 
the  miracles  of  his  apostles.  They  are  equally  well  attested, 
and  no  more  improbable.  Yea,  if  they  were  true,  they 
were  not  believed,  but  absolutely  known  to  be  true  by  the 
apostles.  They  knew  it  as  well  as  they  could  know  the 
truth  of  any  object  of  sight.  And  the  truth  of  what  they 
knew  being  all  which  they  needed  in  support  of  what  they 
taught,  I  do  not  see,  on  this  supposition,  how  they  could  have 
the  occasion,  or  the  motive,  to  state  one  thing  falsely  con- 
cerning it.  No,  nor  could  their  followers  have  any  occa- 
sion to  add  to  their  testimony,  for  nothing  which  they  could 
add  would  be  of  any  more  weight  than  that  which  we  may 
suppose  was  already  in  their  possession.  The  two  first  chap- 
ters of  Matthew  and  Luke  (or  all  except  the  genealogy  in 
Matthew,  and  the  preface  of  Luke)  the  authenticity  of  which 
has  been  suspected  by  some  of  the  learned,  and  I  believe 
not  without  pretty  good  reasons,  do  not  contain  a  single 
word  in  support  of  the  resurrection ;  neither  is  the  subject 
of  them,  as  I  now  recollect,  mentioned  either  by  Christ  or 
any  of  the  apostles  in  any  other  part  of  the  New  Testament. 
And  although  the  truth  of  those  narratives  is  no  more  mirac- 
ulous than  the  resurrection,  yet  I  presume  you  would  not 
contend  that  a  belief  of  these,  also,  is  absolutely  necessary 
to  the  christian  faith. 

"  With  these  observations,  I  shall  once  more,  and  proba- 
bly for  the  last  time  quit  my  second  proposition,  and  proceed 
to  take  notice  of  what  you  have  written  on  my  third. 

u  And  here  you  must  pardon  me  if  I  remark,  without  the 
least  view  of  finding  any  fault,  that  if  my  words  will  admit 
of  a  bad  construction,  that  construction  seems  to  be  the  first 
one  which  strikes  your  mind.  If  you  suppose  me  capable 
of  such  an  abominable  absurdity  as  to  say,  that  if  the  man  of 
this  town  who  was  born  blind  should  be  restored  to  his  sight 
by  some  one's  anointing  his  eyes  with  clay  and  spittle,  and 
this  done  in  our  presence,  we  could  not  know  it !  that  we 
could  not  know  but  that  the  seeing  man  was  a  total  stranger 
whom  we  had  never  before  seen,  and  that  the  blind  man  had 
absconded  no  body  knows  how  or  where  !  I  say,  if  this  was 
the  way  in  which  you  understood  my  third  proposiiion,  you 
are  perfectly  excusable  :  otherwise,  it  is  difficult  to  account 
14 


1J8  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

for  your  remarks.  But,  having  thus  found  your  antagonist, 
you  level  your  artillery  against  him,  nor  desist  until  you 
have  put  to  death  without  mercy  this  creature  of  your  own 
fruitful  imagination.  Having  done,  you  begin  to  query 
whether  you  had  not  mistaken  my  meaning;  and  after  mak- 
ing a  wonderful  etfort,  by  calling  up  these  penetrating  pow- 
ers of  research,  which  are  only  summoned  on  extraordinary 
occasions,  you  dive  through  the  mists  of  obscurity,  in  which 
my  words  seem  to  be  too  often  placed,  and  behold  my  pro- 
position in  its  true  light ! 

"  My  proposftion  is  no  sooner  seen  than  c  granted  :'  which 
is,  that  we  have  no  positive  knowledge  of  miracles  ;  or,  to 
use  your  own  words,  *  miracles  are  not  now  wrought  before 
our  eyes.'  But  although  you  grant  the  truth  of  my  proposi- 
tion, you  do  not  admit  that  this  is  any  objection  against  the 
truth  of  divine  revelation,  for  a  number  of  reasons  which 
you  have  given;  all  of  which,  no  doubt,  are  satisfactory  to 
your  own  mind. 

"  But  sir,  this  is  a  matter  of  opinion  only,  and  if  I  agree 
with  you  at  all,  it  must  be  from  the  consideration  that  the 
Governor  of  the  universe  must  do  right.  But,  although  the 
time  may  not  be  yet,  nevertheless  I  am  clear  in  the  opinion 
that  the  revival  of  miracles  will,  in  process  of  time,  be  abso- 
lutely necessary  in  order  to  preserve  the  faith  in  those  which 
have  already  been.  But,  I  contend,  if  the  scriptures  be  true, 
we  have  a  right  to  expect  the  revival  of  miracles  ;  and  I 
do  not  see  how  they  can  be  fulfilled  without.  Considering 
the  prejudices  of  the  Jews,  as  a  people,  I  cannot  suppose 
that  they  will  ever  believe  in  Jesus,  as  their  promised  Mes- 
sias,  short  of  being  convinced  of  its  truth  by  a  miracle ;  and 
should  they  return  to  the  land  of  Palestine,  and  there  re- 
build their  temple,  at  Jerusalem,  it  would  be  such  a  clear 
fulfilment  of  the  prophecy  of  Ezekiel,  that  it  would  be  equal 
to  a  miracle,  and  do  as  much  towards  corroborating  the 
truth  of  all  the  other  prophecies. 

"  You  finally  come  once  more  to  the  circumstance  of  the 
conversion  of  St.  Paul,  where  you  again  find  some  fault  (and 
1  must  confess,  not  without  some  reason)  at  my  neglect  to 
meet  your  arguments  on  this  subject ;  or  in  other  words,  to 
do  away  the  scripture  account,  and  reconcile  it  with  my  hy- 
pothesis ;  i.  e.  that  of  supposing  him  to  be  converted  with- 
out a  miracle.  To  be  ingenuous  with  you,  sir,  I  must  ac- 
knowledge that  I  have  ever  supposed  this  to  be  the  most  dif- 
ficult task  I  should  have   to  do  ;  and  therefore  I  wished  to 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  J  59 

hear  all  you  had  to  say  on  the  subject  of  the  resurrection  be- 
fore I  attempted  it. 

"  Since  1  wrote  my  last  I  have  examined  Paley's  Horos 
Paulino?,  a  work  of  extraordinary  merit  which  had  never  be- 
fore fallen  into  my  hands:  his  Evidences  of  Christianity,  I 
have  read  several  years  ago,  but  have  not  lately  particularly 
examined  that  work.  In  the  exposition  of  the  argument,  (of 
the  work  first  mentioned)  Paley  sets  forth,  as  1  conceive,  the 
only  posible  grounds  on  which  either  the  epistles  of  St. 
Paul,  or  the  acts  of  the  apostles,  can  be  supposed  to  be  for- 
geries, in  their  full  force.  And  then  he  attempts  to  prove 
their  genuineness  by  their  internal  evidence,  which  they 
contain  within  themselves,  entirely  aside  from  those  objec- 
tions ;  and  which  would  have  been  of  equal  weight  even  on 
the  supposition  that  the  whole  had  been  concealed  from  the 
time  they  were  written  till  now,  and  we  should  now,  for  the 
first  time,  examine  them.  And  although  I  might  not  fully 
agree  with  him  in  all  points,  yet  I  think  he  proves,  beyond 
all  contradiction  or  rational  doubt,  what  he  mainlyattempts  to 
prove  ;  i.  e.  that  the  epistles  were  written  by  some  person 
acquainted  with  the  circumstances  mentioned  in  the  history, 
and  that  the  writer  of  the  history  must  have  been  acquainted 
with  the  circumstances  alluded  to  in  the  epistles,  where,  at 
the  same  time,  there  is  not  the  least  apparent  design  in  those 
references  or  allusions;  which,  as  he  very  justly  argues, 
prove  the  genuineness  of  both.  I  do  not  pretend  to  quote 
his  words,  as  the  book  is  not  now  by  me. 

"  This,  it  must  be  confessed,  is  a  great  acquisition  in  fa- 
vour of  the  truth  of  Christianity  ;  because  it  evidently  car- 
ries the  writings  back  into  those  times  when  every  thing  wTas 
fresh  in  the  minds  of  all  who  had  any  knowledge  of  the  sub- 
ject of  which  those  writings  treated.  Now  comes  the  point. 
Paul  expressly  declares  that  he  saw  Christ  after  he  was  risen 
from  the  dead.  His  declaring  that  he  was  seen  of  Cephas, 
then  of  the  twelve,  could  have  been  only  from  the  report  of 
others  ;  but  it  agrees  pretty  well  with  what  has  been  record- 
ed by  the  evangelist?.  His  declaring  that  he  had  been  seen 
1  of  above  live  hundred  brethren  at  once,'  must  have  been 
also  by  report,  which  report  might  have  been  incorrect,  as 
there  is  no  mention  made  of  it  in  either  of  the  gospels.  Yet 
if  incorrect  it  might  have  been  very  easily  refuted.  But 
when  he  comes  to  say,  ■"  And  last  of  all  he  was  seen  of  m 
also,  as  of  one  born  out  of  due  time,'  there  remains  for  him 
no  such  excuse.     Paul,  as  it  seems,  could  not  believe  that  he 


]60  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

had  seen  Jesus,  literally,  and  personally,  when  he  had  not. 
And  if  he  knew  that  he  had  not,  and  yet  declared  that  he 
had,  and  meant  that  others  should  helieve  that  he  had,  he 
was  not  honest,  as  I  before  admitted  that  he  was;  and  now 
to  say  that  he  was  not  honest,  as  I  clearly  see,  would  in- 
volve me  in  still  greater  difficulty,  as  then  I  could  give  no 
rational  account  for  his  life  and  conduct.  What  shift  shall  I 
now  make  ?  For  having  supposed  that  my  doubts  were 
really  founded  on  reason,  I  must  have  good  reason  for  so 
doing  before  I  can  give  them  up  :  i.  e.  I  must  be  fully  con- 
vinced that  they  are  founded  in  error. 

"  What  can  we  suppose  that  Paul  meant  by  Christ's  being 
seen  of  above  Jive  hundred  brethren  at  once  ?  Is  it  at  all  likely 
that  such  an  extraordinary  circumstance  should  have  hap- 
pened without  any  mention  being  made  of  it  in  either  of  the 
five  histories  which  we  have  of  those  times?  Might  he  not 
mean  the  same  which  the  author  of  the  Acts  means,  speak- 
ing of  the  day  of  Pentecost  ?  And  therefore  the  whole 
might  not  have  been  designed  to  be  understood  literally, 
jt  spiritually  true?  And  notwithstanding  the  literality  of 
the  language,  may  not  all  the  miracles  of  Christ  and  the 
;«postles,  and  even  the  account  we  have  of  the  resurrection, 
Le  all  accounted  for  and  reconciled  in  the  same  way?  But 
here  I  involve  myself  in  difficulty  again;  for,  if  I  mistake 
not,  this  was  very  near  the  opinion  of  the  Gnostics,  whom 
the  apostles  and  fathers  every  where  spake  against. — 
4  These,'  says  Dr.  Priestley,  '  taught  that  it  was  not  Jesus 
that  was  properly  the  Christ,  or  that  he  had  not  flesh  and 
blood  like  other  men.'  They  also  *  denied  the  doctrine  of 
the  resurrection.'  These  therefore,  'Paul,  Peter,  Jude, 
and  John,  most  strenuously  opposed.'  Again,  says  he, 
•  The  apostles  they  considered  as  judging  only  by  their  sen- 
ses, which  were  deceived  in  this  case  :  and  though  they 
gave  entire  credit  to  them  with  respect  to  every  thing 
which  they  had  seen,  or  heard,  they  considered  them  as 
plain  unlettered  men  who  were  ignorant  of  what  was  not 
within  the  sphere  of  their  senses.'  To  these  it  is  supposed 
that  John  alludes  in  his  tirst  Epistle  iv.  1 — 3.  If,  therefore, 
the  apostles  did  believe,  and  contend  for  the  literal  resur- 
rection, and  personal  appearing  of  Jesus,  and  if  in  this  they 
were  opposed  by  the  Gnostics,  even  in  their  day;  there  is 
no  way  now,  that  I  see,  any  longer  for  me  to  maintain  my 
doubts  only  by  believing  that  the  tirst  diciples,  as  well  as 
Paul,  thought  they  saw  Jesus  when  in  fact  they  did  not,  and 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  161 

that  the  idea  of  miracles  by  which  these  things  were  said  to 
have  been  propagated  and  which  carried  conviction  to  the 
multitudes,  was  nothing  more  than  the  bold  figurative  lan- 
guage of  the  da}',  designed,  in  reality,  to  deceive  no  one  ; 
or  else  mere  exaggerations:  or,  what  perhaps  is  still  more 
probable,  partly  of  both.  **********  ]}ut  enough  ! 

"  I  confess  I  begin  to  grow  dissatisfied  with  this  kind  of 
reasoning.  What  does  it  all  amount  to  ?  What  am  I  bring- 
ing, after  all,  to  oppose  the  laboured  researches  of  Prs. 
Lardner,  Paley,  Priestley,  and  others,  as  well  as  the  perti- 
nent observations  of  my  worthy  friend  who  has  so  long  borne 
with  me,  and  obliged  me  with  his  friendly  and  christian-like 

aid  on  this  subject?     Let  me  pause  and  consider 1  have 

acknowledged  that  there  are  evidences  in  favour  of  divine 
revelation;  have  I  proved  any  of  those  evidences  fatee  ? — 
No  !  this  I  have  acknowledged  I  could  not  do.  What  have 
I  put  into  the  other  end  of  the  scale,  to  weigh  down  those 
evidences  ?  Ah  !  what  indeed  !  Nothing  !  except  it  be  my 
own  ignorance,  and  the  errors  of  other  men,  in  whose  er- 
rors I  have  no  more  faith  than  those  who  believe  in  the 
truth  of  that  which  I  have  been  disputing  !  I  will  therefore, 
instead  of  pursuing  the  dispute  any  further,  begin  to  think 
once  more  whether  the  thing  for  which  you  so  ardently 
contend  may  not  in  reality  be  true. 

"  But,  here  again,  I  must  be  cautious,  lest  I  should  err  as 
far  on  the  other  hand.  For  notwithstanding  when  I  found 
that  I  could  not  help  doubting,  I  tried  to  reconcile  myself  to 
my  doubts,  and  have  sincerely  and  honestly  tried  to  make 
myself  believe  that  I  was  perfectly  reconciled  either  way  ; 
3'et  the  moment  I  begin  to  think  about  the  certainty  of  im- 
mortality and  eternal  life,  I  am  all  on  fire  !  I  hardly  know 
how  to  contain  myself!  And  were  it  not  for  the  special  ob- 
ligations, which  I  feel  to  my  family,  and  to  the  world,  more 
than  any  thing  which  I  ever  expect  to  receive  from  the 
world,  I  should  long  to  '  depart,  and  be  with  Christ,  which  is 
far  better.'  Thus  my  doubts,  whatever  they  are,  may  be 
needful  for  me. 

u  Your  remarks  respecting  my  claims  to  the  privilege  of 
one  who  is  weak  in  the  faith  are  very  pertinent  and  just. 
For  I  must  confess  in  proportion  as  my  doubts  arose,  as  to 
the  truth  of  the  resurrection,  equal  doubts  would  arise  as  to 
the  propriety  of  preaching  it  for  a  truth.  I  wiih  you  to  un- 
derstand, however,  that  my  mind  has  never  been  settled 
there,  if  it  has  ever  vibrated  that  way,  it  was  only  momecv 
14* 


162  SERIES   OF    LETTERS. 

tary,  and  rather  on  mere  supposition  than  any  confirmed 
opinion. 

"  In  answer  to  what  you  say  in  regard  to  hope,  I  will  only 
add.  Though  a  man  should  have  ever  so  firm  a  hope  in 
any  thing  whatever,  and  should  afterwards  find  that  his 
hope  was  founded  in  error,  the  hope  would  be  taken  away  ; 
but  if  at  the  same  time  he  should  find  that  the  truth  is  abso- 
lutely better  than  the  error  hoped  for,  he  would  also  find 
that  a  better  thing  is  given  in  lieu  of  his  hope  :  but  if  a  man 
has  hope,  though  that  hope  should  be  founded  in  error,  if 
the  hope  remain  as  long  as  the  man  exists,  it  is  not  taken 
away  from  him,  as  both  cease  to  exist  together.  Once 
more,  and  finally;  a  hope  which  is  founded  in  truth,  a 
knowledge  of  the  truth  can  never  take  away.  Although  a 
man  may  hope,  and  ardently  desire  to  exist  eternally,  yet  I 
do  not  see  how  a  man  can  extend  either  his  hope,  or  his  de- 
sires, beyond  the  possibility  of  his  existence.  To  my  under- 
standing, this  is  just  like  supposing  that  a  man  which  does 
not  exist  may  yet  hope  and  desire  ;  or  that  a  man  may  hope 
and  desire,  after  he  shall  have  ceased  to  exist. 

"  After  returning  you  my  sincere  thanks  for  your  kind  in- 
dulgence and  labours  of  love,  I  shall  close  the  present  num- 
ber. I  cannotiake  my  leave  of  this  number,  however,  with- 
out expressing  my  humble  gratitudo  to  the  Allwise  disposer 
of  events,  that  he  has  given  such  abundant  manifestations  of 
his  unspeakable  goodness  to  his  creatures  ;  that  he  has  also, 
as  I  may  perhaps  be  permitted  to  hope  with  you,  given  a 
divine  testimony  of  his  infinite  love  and  universal  benevo- 
lence to  that  part  of  his  creation  whom  he  hath  distinguish- 
ed with  the  attributes  of  his  own  nature,  regarding  at  the 
same  time  all  other  beings  and  things,  and  that  he  had  rais- 
ed up  so  many  faithful  witnesses  who  have  set  to  their 
seals  that  this  testimony  is  true. 

"  Yours,  &c.  A.  KNERLAND." 


LETTER  VIII. 

Dear  sir,  and  brother, — The  particulars  contained  in  your 
ninth  letter,  which  I  have  selected  as  the  subject  of  this, 
are  the  following: 

1st.  You  "  do  not  see  how  the  miracles  of  the  Shakers  are 
at  all  dependant  on  the  miracles  of  Jesus  for  their  imposi- 
tion." 


SERIES   OP   LETTERS.  163 

2d.  You  think,  if  Jesus  had  remained  on  the  earth  until 
now,  or  had  appeared  to  every  generation  since  his  resurrec- 
tion, the  evidence  would  have  heen  much  greater ;  and  yet 
not  so  great  as  to  preclude  the  exercise  of  our  reasoning 
faculties. 

3d.  In  the  supposed  controversy  between  the  Unitarians 
and  Trinitarians,  you  think  I  have  failed  of  making  the  case 
a  parallel  with  my  subject,  not  considering  the  great  change 
which  took  place  in  the  state  of  the  Jews  in  consequence  of 
their  destruction  by  the  Romans. 

4th.  The  argument  which  you  rest  on  the  supposition, 
that  the  appostles  did  in  reality  believe  in  the  resurrection 
of  Jesus,  when  in  fact  the  thing  was    not  true. 

5th.  What  you  say  of  the  necessity  of  miracles  in 
some  future  time,  to  confirm  the  belief  of  those  which  have 
been. 

6th.  The  difficulty  you  suggest  concerning  St.  Paul's  say- 
ing that  Jesus  was  seen,  after  his  resurrection,  by  more  than 
five  hundred  brethren  at  once. 

1st.  As  you  object  to  the  idea  that  the  miracles  of  the 
Shakers  depend  at  all  on  the  miracles  of  Jesus  for  their  im- 
position, it  may  be  considered  sufficient,  on  my  part,  if  I  show 
that  you  have  fully  supported  the  proposition  which  you 
profess  not  to  see. 

I  will,  however,  first  presume,  that  I  am  not  authorised  to 
say  that  the  miracles  of  the  Shakers  are  imposition,  I  have 
not  contended  that  they  are  ;  the  ground  for  which  I  con- 
tend is  this,  viz.  if  these  or  any  other  pretended  miracles 
among  us  are  impositions,  they  depend  on  the  miracles  of 
Jesus  for  this  power,  as  much  as  counterfeit  money  de- 
pends on  the  true  for  its  imposition.  That  you  have  given 
sufficient  support  to  what  I  have  stated,  you  will  see  at  once 
by  the  following  passage  quoted  from  your  arguments  on 
this  subject  :  "  They  do  not  deny  the  miracles  of  Christ  and 
his  apostles  any  more  than  Christians  in  general  deny  the 
miracles  of  Moses  and  the  prophets  ;  but  appeal  to  theirs  as 
being  equally  of  divine  origin,  and  thereby  clothe  their  re- 
ligion with  the  same  divine  authority."  Is  it  possible  that 
the  writer  of  the  foregoing  sentence  should  not  see,  that  he 
established  the  very  thing  which  he  had  just  said  he  could 
not  see  ?  What  is  that  divine  authority  with  which  the  re- 
ligion of  Moses,  the  prophets  and  of  Christ  is  clothed  ?  An- 
swer, miracles.  What  authority  do  you  pretend  the  Shak- 
ers make  use  of  to  clothe  their  religion  ?  Answer"  the  same.'''' 


164  SERIES    OF   LETTERS. 

How  does  this  differ  from  counterfeit  money,  on  the  suppo- 
sition that  these  miracles  are  imposition  ? 

It  is  abundantly  evident  that  the  Jews  expected  that  the 
Messiah,  when  he  came,  would  establish  his  character  by 
miracles  as  Moses  did  his,  and  as  some  of  the  prophets  were 
enabled  to  do.  Therefore,  do  we  read  Matt.  xii.  22,  23. — 
"  Then  was  brought  unto  him  one  possessed  with  a  devil, 
blind  and  dumb  :  and  he  healed  him  insomuch,that  the  blind 
and  dumb  both  spake  and  saw.  And  all  the  people  were 
amazed  and  said,  is  not  this  the  son  of  David  ? 

Jesus  himself  saith,  Luke  iv.  24,  27."  Verily  I  say  unto 
you,  no  prophet  is  accepted  in  his  own  country.  But  I  tell 
you  of  a  truth,  many  widows  were  in  Israel  in  the  days  of 
Elias,  when  the  heaven  was  shut  up  three  years  and  six 
months,  when  great  famine  was  throughout  all  the  land  ; 
but  unto  none  of  them  was  Elias  sent,  save  unto  Sarepta,  a 
city  of  Sidon,unto  a  woman  that  was  a  widow  ;  and  many  le- 
pers were  in  Israel  in  the  time  of  Eliseus  the  prophet  ;  and 
none  of  them  was  cleansed,  saveing  Naaman  the  S3'rian." — 
See  John  vii.  31 .  "  And  many  of  the  people  believed  on 
him,  and  said,  when  Christ  cometh,  will  he  do  more  mira- 
cles than  these  which  this  man  hath  done  ?" 

By  the  foregoing  quotations,  as  by  many  other  passages, 
we  learn  that  the  Jews  expected  the  Messiah  would  estab- 
lish his  character  as  a  prophet  like  unto  Moses  and  others, 
and  also  that  Jesus  did  in  reality  a  multitude  of  miracles 
more  than  the  prophets  did. 

Now  is  it  not  evident,  that  if  the  miracles  of  Jesus  were 
supposed  to  be  impositions,  they  were  dependant  on  those  of 
Moses  and  the  prophets  for  any  power  to  impose  on  the  peo- 
ple ?  Just  so  are  all  miracles  wrought  or  pretended  to  be 
wrought  since  Christ,  dependant  on  his  miracles  for  any  im- 
posing power  which  they  possess.  If  our  religion  had  not 
been  first  propagated  by  the  means  of  those  miracles  which 
are  recorded  in  the  New  Testament,  of  what  use  would  any 
pretended   miracles  be  to  any  sect  of  christians  ? 

2d.  What  you  say  of  the  greater  evidence  of  the  resur- 
rection which  would  have  been  furnished  by  Christ's  con- 
tinuance on  earth  until  now,  or  by  his  making  his  appear- 
ance in  every  generation  since  his  lime,  appears  to  me  to  be 
rather  wanting  in  its  merits  by  which  it  claims  a  reply. — 
Why  should  you  neglect  to  delineate  some  special  reasons 
for  your  suppositions,  by  showing  how  wide  the  difference 
would  have  been  from  the  evidence  we  now  have,  and  how 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  1C5 

that  difference  would  have  recommended  your  scheme  ? — 
You  have  left  me  to  conjecture  the  particular  features  of 
your  argument,  and  if  I  mistake  them,  you  will  reply  that 
I  understand  you  incorrectly.  However,  this  is  the  way  I 
must  proceed. 

We  will  suppose  then  that  Jesus,  in  room  of  ascending  in- 
to heaven,  had  remained  on  earth.  Would  this  have  done 
any  good,  unless  he  had  made  himself  known  to  ail  the  peo- 
ple ?  Well,  we  will  suppose  he  had  made  himself  known  af- 
ter his  resurrection,  to  the  whole  house  of  Israel,  would  the 
people  not  have  believed  ?  They  would  have  believed 
most  assuredly,  or  his  making  himself  known  to  them  would 
have  done  no  good.  If  they  had  all  believed  they  would 
not  have  persecuted  the  religion  of  Christ,  all  would  have 
embraced  it  at  once  being  convinced  by  their  eyes,  that  Je- 
sus who  was  crucified,  had  actually  rose  from  the  dead,  and 
was  not  subject  to  death  any  more.  All  this  would  have 
been  as  evident  to  the  Roman  government  as  to  the  Jewish 
hierarchy,  and  the  whole  would  have  been  christianized  at 
once.  How  long  would  ail  this  remain  a  wonder  ?  Jesus 
remains  on  earth  from  generaiion  to  generation.  How  long 
ago  would  the  conjecture  have  arisen,  that  this  man  who 
has  lived  through  so  many  ages,  had  always  been  here  on 
earth,  and  that  the  tradition  of  his  once  having  been  mor- 
tal like  other  men,  was  nothing  but  a  superstition  gotten  up 
in  some  age  of  antiquity  beyond  our  reach  ?  There  would 
have  been  no  occasion  of  preserving  any  records  of  the  won- 
derful works  of  Jesus  in  the  days  of  his  flesh,  for  as  the 
whole  would  become  immediately  connected  to  Christian- 
ity, there  would  have  been  no  necessity  nor  excitement 
to  write  and  preserve  the  accounts  we  have  in  the  gospel,  or 
if  they  had  been  written,  they  could  have  had  no  support 
now  but  ancient  tradition.  Not  one  martyr,  not  one  in- 
stance of  persecution,  not  a  Celsus  in  the  second,  a  Porphy- 
ry in  the  third,  nor  a  Julian  in  the  fourth  centuries  to  op- 
pose the  truth,  and  thereby  bear  testimony  to  the  antiquity 
of  the  christian  history. 

This  immortal  man  would  be  here  on  earth,  and  the  sun 
and  the  moon  and  the  stars  would  be  in  the  heavens,  the 
mountains  and  the  rivers  here  on  earth  ;  and  the  same  mind 
that  would  conjecture  that  all  these  visible  things  were 
from  everlasting  to  everlasting,  would  make  no  exception  of 
this  man  Christ  Jesns.  But  now  you  are  called  on  to  prove 
your  christian  tradition  ;  and  what  have  you  to  convince  the 


166  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

Deist  with  ?  Will  you  say  my  conjectures  are  by  no  means 
correct  ?  Well,  1  expected  it  would  turn  out  so.  You  mean 
then  that  Jesus  should  not  only  remain  on  earth,  but  that  he 
should  continue  the  evidences  of  his  having  been  mortal,  of 
his  having-  died,  and  of  his  resurrection  as  clear  as  they 
were  when  they  convinced  the  world  in  the  first  place. — 
Would  there,  in  this  case,  be  any  room  for  any  inquiry  ? 
any  for  doubts  ?  VVTould  there  be  as  many  denominations  of 
christians  as  there  are  now  ?  Should  we  get  at  this  religion 
by  reasoning  ?  Perhaps  you  would  prefer  your  second 
proposal,  and  have  Jesus  manifested  in  every  genera- 
tion. But  this  would  have  been  a  regular  return  of  the 
same  event,  and  would  have  been  placed  among  the  phe- 
nomena of  nature,  and  the  Deist  would  say  that  there  never 
had  been  any  beginning  to  this  regular  operation,  it  has  al- 
ways been  so  from  time  beyond  date. 

Thus  far,  but  no  more.  The  evidences  of  our  religion 
are  like  the  religion  itself,  infinitely  superior  to  any  thing 
ever  contrived  by  human  wisdom.  And  it  is  an  opinion  in 
which  I  am  the  more  confirmed,  the  more  I  examine  it, 
that  if  the  wisest  set  of  philosophers  which  ever  lived  on 
earth  had  been  a  council  to  contrive  a  method  by  which 
Christianity  could  have  been  perpetuated  in  the  world,  that 
scheme  which  they  would  have  projected,  would  of  itself 
defeated  the  object. 

The  wisdom  of  this  great  scheme  corresponds  with  the 
divine  power  which  has  been  manifested  in  it.  What  set  of 
impostors,  either  wise  or  simple,  learned  or  unlearned  would 
ever  have  thought  of  such  an  undertaking  as  that  of  which 
we  have  an  account  in  the  four  evangelists  ?  Would  they 
be  likely  to  find  one  who  would  he  their  leader,  the  one  to 
die, and  leave  the  rest  to  make  the  people  believe  that  he  a- 
rose  from  the  dead  ?  Could  a  man  be  found  now  who 
would  be  willing  to  undertake  such  a  piece  of  madness  and 
folly  ?  If  we  pretend  to  reason  shall  we  not  keep  to  human 
nature,  and  reason  according  to  those  laws  by  which  our- 
selves and  others  are  governed  ? 

Do  you  believe,  sir,  that  a  man  could  be  found  who  would 
undertake  to  lead  a  party,  whose  object  should  be  to  impose 
on  the  people  by  a  pretended  resurrection,  and  consent  him- 
self to  be  the  hero  of  this  imposture  ? 

You  answer,  no.  But  then  ask  ;  if  this  wonderful  story 
was  not  written  some  considerable  time  after  that  period  to 
which  the  dates  of  the  writings  are  assigned,  and  such  large 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  ]  67 

additions  made  that  the  whole    appears    entirely  different 
from  what  was  really  true  ? 

This  brings  me  to  consider  the  third  particular  selected 
for  consideration,  out  of  your  epistle. 

3dly.  In  allusion  to  the  supposed  controversy  between  the 
Unitarians  and  Trinitarians,  you  think  I  ought  to  have  con- 
sidered the  circumstance  of  the  destruction  of  the  Jews  by 
the  Romans,  as  giving  a  favourable  opportunity  for  the  fab- 
ricating the  books  of  the  evangelists,  and  of  giving  them 
success  in  the  world,  as  the  old  pharisees  and  rulers  of  the 
Jews  were  principally  cut  off  in  that  awful  destruction  of 
their  nation  and  city. 

You  will  observe  that  by  your  snjrgr-estion  vou  leave  the 
first  section  of  the  argument  to  which  you  refer,  in  which 
no  book  or  books  were  used,  and  notice  only  the  last  sec- 
tion in  which  you  were  indulged,  for  sake  of  the  argument, 
in  the  supposition  that  the  gospels  were  not  written  un!il  af- 
ter the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  nor  propagated  on  the  mir- 
acles on  which  the  gospels  have  founded  it.  Here,  sir, 
have  I  not  an  occasion  of  some  little  complaint  ?  If  you 
really  thought  that  the  evangelsits  were,  none  of  them, 
written  in  the  life  time  of  the  apostles,  and  considered  it 
safe  to  predicate  an  argument  on  this  ground,  why  should 
you  withhold  the  proof  of  this  fact  ?  Why  did  you  not  in- 
form me  of  the  authority  by  which  your  argument  is  sup- 
ported in  your  own  mind  ?  And  furthermore,  why  do  you 
try  to  get  away  from  the  argnment  as  stated  in  its  first 
form,  without  showing  its  want  of  force,  or  without  allow- 
ing its  merit  ?  By  conducting  arguments  in  this  way,  in 
room  of  converguingtbem  to  some  definite  point  of  conclu- 
sion, they  are  diverged  indefinitely,  and  the  mind  seems 
bewildered  without  an  object. 

However,  I  am  disposed  to  follow  you,  and  will  now  en- 
deavour to  shew  the  probability  of  the  gospel's  having 
been  written  even  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 

The  following  passages  are  quoted  from  Paley's  eviden- 
ces from  page  106  and  on — 

From  the  epistle  of  Barnabas,  to  which  I  have  before 
alluded  ;  "  Let  us,  therefore,  beware  lest  it  come  upon  us, 
as  it  is  written,  there  are  many  called,  few  chosen."  Our 
author  justly  adds  :  t(  From  the  expression,  '  as  it  is  zvrittcnj 
we  infer  with  certainty,  that,  at  the  time  when  the  author 
of  this  epistle  lived,  there  was  a  book  extant,  well  known 
to    christians,   and   of  authority   among   them,    containing 


168  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

these  words — "  Many  are  called,  few  chosen."  For  the 
authority  of  this  epistle  I  refer  unto  Clement  of  Alexan- 
dria, Origen,  Eusebius,  and  Jerome,  noticed  in  a  former 
communication.  If  Clement  were  liable  to  mistake  the 
author,  it  seems  hardly  probable  that  he  would  be  deceived 
concerning-  the  time  when  this  epistle,  purporting-  (o  have 
been  written  by  Barnabas,  was  written  ;  as  it  is  no  later 
than  A.  D.  194  that  he  quotes  this  epistle  as  an  ancient 
work.  It  may  be  proper  to  remark,  that  although  au- 
thors differ  respecting  the  genuineness  of  this  epistle,  both 
Dr.  Priestly  and  Paley  acknowledge  and  maintain  its  an- 
tiquity, and  place  it  very  near  to  the  time  of  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem,  which  gives  it  all  the  authority  for 
which  it  is  here  quoted  ;  for  the  thing  now  to  be  proved  is, 
that  it  is  probable  that  the  gospel  of  Matthew  was  written 
before  the  destruction  of  the  Jewish  hierarchy.  Now  as 
this  epistle  of  Barnabas  was  written  soon  after  this  destruc- 
tion, and  refers  to  the  gospel  of  Matthew  in  the  manner  a- 
bove  quoted,  as  refering  to  what  was  an  acknowledged  writ- 
ing of  scripture  authority,  it  seems  reasonable  to  infer  that 
St.  Matthew's  gospel  had  been  written  long  enough  before, 
to  obtain  its  establishment  among  christian  churches,  which 
fairly  throws  its  antiquity  anterior  to  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem.  Sir,  1  see  nothing  to  forbid  this  conclusion  from 
being  highly  probable,  and  this,  I  expect  to  show,  is  all 
that  is  necessary  to  be  made  out  in  this  case. 

"  Of  Polycarp,"  who  was  appointed  bishop  of  Syrarnaby 
the  apostles  themselves,  says  our  author,  u  we  have  one  un- 
doubted epistle  remaining.  And  this,  though  a  short  letter, 
contains  nearly  forty  clear  allusions  to  books  of  the  New 
Testament  ;  which  is  strong  evidence  of  the  respect  which 
christians  of  that  age  bore  for  those  books."  It -appears 
from  this  account,  that,  as  Polycarp  was  a  contemporary  of 
the  apostles,  and  referred  to  the  books  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment in  his  writings,  as  to  books  of  established  authority, 
these  books  must  have  been  written  as  early  as  the  time  in 
which  their  reputed  authors  lived,  which  places  their  date 
prior  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  ;  as  it  is  not  pretended 
that  any  of  the  evangelists  continued  until  after  the  destruc- 
tion of  that  city  except  St.  John  who  is  supposed  to  have 
lived  to  a  very  great  age. 

One  more  from  our  author  :  "  Papias,  a  hearer  of  John, 
and  companion  of  Polycarp,  as  lreuaeus  attests,  and  of  that 
age,  as  all  agree,  in  a  passage  quoted  by  Eusebius,    from 


I 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  i  09 

a  work  now  lost,  expressly  ascribes  the  respective  gospels 
fo  Matthew  and  M.irk,  and  in  a  manner  which  proves  that 
those  gospels  must  havp  publicly  borne  the  name'  of  these 
anthers  at  that  time,  and  probably  long  before."  All  this 
appears  perfecly  consistent  with  the  idea  that  these  gos- 
pels were  written  by  the  evangelists  themselves,  and  proves 
together  with  the  following  considerations  ihe  probability 
of  its  being  correct.  Further  considerations  to  be  taken  in- 
to the  foergoing  account  are  the  following.  St.  Matthew, 
St.  Luke  and  St.  Mark,  all  speak  of  the  prophesy  of  Jesus 
respecting  the  destruction  of  Jesusalem,  but  do  not  even  hint 
■  hat  (his  prophesy  had  been  fulfilled.  In  St.  John's  gospel  no 
mention  is  made  of  this  prophesy,  and  it  is  reasonable 
enough  to  suppose  that  this  omission  was  on  account  of  the 
prophesy's  having  been  fulfilled  before  his  gospel  was  writ- 
fen. 

Again,  if  the  gospels  had  not   been  written  by   these  re- 
puted  authors,  nor  in    the  time  that  the  evangelists    lived, 
but  some  time  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  these 
hud  been   fabricated  by  designing  men,  they  would  certainly 
have  been    exposed  as  a    fraud  by     the  Gnostics  who  held 
ranny    opinions  so    very  contrary    to  the  scriptures    of  the 
New  Testament.     So  very  contrary  were  some  of  the   ear- 
ly heresies,  to  the  writings    of  the    evangelists    that    they 
erased  many  things  from  them  that    they  might    the  better 
maintain  their  own    notions.     Now  this  would  never  have 
taken  place  if  these  Gnostics  could  have   proved  that  these 
Gospels  were  frauds,  which  they  certainly  could  have  done, 
for  they  existed  as   early  as  these  writings  are  supposed  to 
have  been  written.     Furthermore,    if  the  evangelists    had 
been  forged  books,   written  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusa- 
lem, it  would  have  been  an  easy  task  for  Celsus  to  have  ex- 
posed  the  whole  fraud.     He    certainly  would  never  have 
admitted  the  truth  of  the  miracles  of  Jesus  if  he  could  have 
proved  that  the  books  in  which  they  were  recorded   were 
forgeries.     But  this  neither  he  nor  the   learned  Porphyry 
attempted  to  do. 

I  have  suggested,  that,  if  the  probability  of  the  gospel's 
having  been  written  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem 
and  by  the  evangelists  themselves  be  proved  it  is  sufficient 
for  our  present  argument.  And  so,  I  think,  it  will  appear  to 
you,  when  you  combine  with  this  probability  two  more  im- 
portant considerations. 

1st.  That    the    internal    evidences    contained    in    the 
15 


170  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

books  of  the  New  Testament,  of  their  genuineness,  are  suffi- 
cient of  themselves  to  establish  their  character  as  such  ;  and 

2d.  That  the  above  probability  of  itself  is  to  be  relied  on 
even  from  external  evidence  if  no  external  proof  can  be 
proved  against  it,  which  is  not  pretended. 

It  should  be  kept  in  mind,  that  the  writings  of  the  evan- 
gelists are  guarded  by  the  early  attacks  of  the  enemies  of 
Christianity,  who  ever  treated  them  as  being,  what  they 
pretended  to  be,  a  faithful  history  of  the  origin  of  the  reli- 
gion they  inculcated  ;  and  also  by  the  opposition  of  the 
early  sects  who  arose  from  the  church,  who  would  have  de- 
molished their  foundations  if  they  had  been  spurious. 

4th.  The  argument  you  rest  on  the  supposition  that  the 
apostles  did,  in  reality,  believe  in  the  resurrection  of  Jesus, 
when  in  fact  the  thing  was  not  true,  may  now  be  noticed. — 
As  you  would  naturally  expect,  I  shall  by  no  means  allow 
either  your  premises  or  conclusions. 

1st.  Why  should  I  allow  you  premises  ?  You  have 
brought  no  argument,  nor  attempted  to  bring  any  to  disprove 
what  I  contended  for,  viz.  that  the  apostles  could  not  have 
been  persuaded  to  believe  the  resurrection  with  any  evi- 
dence short  of  that  recorded  in  the  evangelists.  "  Here," 
you  say  "  lies  the  mistake  if  there  be  any  ;"  and  to  this  I  a- 
gree.  Where  then  is  your  argument  against  mine,  on 
which  so  much  depends  ?  You  have  attempted  to  bring 
none.  But  you  say  ;  "  only  suppose  the  resurrection  to 
have  been  actually  believed,  by  any  evidence,  or  ciqpum- 
stance  whatever,  no  matter  what."  What  argument  is  there 
sir,  in  this  "  only  suppose  ?"  I  contend  the  thing  is  not  sup- 
posable.  It  was  as  true  in  that  age  of  the  world,  that  a 
fact  naturally  incredible  requires  indubitable  evidence  to 
substantiate  it,  as  it  is  now.  I  would  allow  that  it  is  suppos- 
able,  that  one  man  might,  in  a  sort  of  a  delirium,  which  gen- 
erally throws  the  brain  into  a  situation,  by  which,  what  only 
exists  in  the  mind,  appears  a  reality  to  the  sense  of  sight, 
might  think  he  saw  Jesus  after  his  crucifixion,  when  in  fact 
he  did  not.  But  I  cannot  allow  it  to  be  a  supposable  case 
that  the  whole  eleven  apostles  should  all  become  delirous  at 
once  and  with  them  a  number  more,  and  all  be  persuaded 
against  the  prejudices  of  their  minds,  that  they  saw  Jesus, 
and  that  at  a  number  of  times,  and  in  divers  manners,  when 
there  was  no  such  thing.     But 

2d.  Even  allowing  your  supposition,  your  consequences 
would  be   Tery  uulikely  to  follow.     You  surely  would  not 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  171 

suppose  that  the  apostles  could  believe  they  saw  Jesus 
when  they  did  not,  if  they  had  the  use  of  their  reason  prop- 
erly. We  must  suppose  them  to  have  been  insane  then. — 
What  then  would  have  been  the  consequences  ?  Would  the 
authority  have  put  these  mad-men  to  death  ?  Would  they 
have  been  persecuted  at  all  for  their  misfortune  ?  But  these 
mad-men  preached  Jesus  and  the  resurrection  to  the  peo- 
ple,and  so  convinced  them  of  the  fact, that  multitudes  believ- 
ed them,  and  on  this  supposition  we  are  now  to  suppose  our 
religion  was  first  established  in  the  world  !  If  we  may  suppose 
such  things, there  are  no  absurdities  that  we  may  not  suppose. 
You  must  suppose  it  to  be  a  very  dangerous  thing-  to  try  a 
man  for  his  life  by  a  jury  of  twelve  men  ,  for  if  the  man 
was  innocent  of  the  murder  for  which  he  was  indicted  and  no 
evidence  was  produced  to  convict  him  on,  these  men  niijrht 
all  be  made  to  believe,  some  how,  by  some  circumstance, 
;t  no  matter  what,"  that  they  all  saw  the  murder  committed 
by  this  very  innocent  person  on  trial. 

5th.  I  thought  of  saying  something  on  your  suggestion  of 
the  necessity  of  miracles  in  some  future  time  to  convince 
the  Jews  thai  Jesos  is  the  Messiah,  but  being  a  little  more 
careful,  than  at  first,  1  find  you^eem  to  give  up  this  matter. 
You  say  ;  "  considering  the  prejudices  of  the  Jews,  as  a 
people,  1  cannot  suppose  that  they  will  ever  believe  in  Je- 
sus, as  their  promised  Messias  short  of  being  convinced  of 
its  truth  by  a  miracle;  and  should  they  return  to  the  land 
of  Palestine,  and  there  rebuild  their  temple,  at  Jerusalem, 
it  would  be  such  a  clear  fulfilment  of  the  prophesy  of  Eze- 
kiel,  that  it  would  be  equal  to  a  miracle,  and  do  as  much  to- 
wards corroborating  the  truth  of  all  the  other  prophecies/' 
If  the  return  of  the  Jews,  &c.  be  equal  to  miracles,  then  it 
may  preclude  their  necessity.  But  as  this  particular  does 
not  immediately  concern  our  general  subject  it  is  dismis- 
sed. 

6th.  As  none  of  the  evangelists  have  been  particular  res- 
pecting the  meeting  in  Galilee,  and  as  this  was  an  appoint- 
ment even  before  the  crucifixion,  as  well  as  afterward,  it  is 
fairly  within  the  reach  of  probable  conjecture,  that  this 
meeting  was  sufficiently  numerous  to  justify  St.  Paul's  words. 
He  does  not  speak  of  this  matter  as  of  a  subject  with  which 
his  acquaintance  was  small,  for  he  says  ;  "  he  was  seen  of 
above  five  hundred  brethren  at  once  ;  of  whom  the  great- 
er part  remain  unto  this  present,  but  some  are  fallen  asleep.*' 
He  no  doubt,  had  seen  many  of  this  great  number  and  had 


372  SERIES   OF    LETTERS. 

been  informed  of  the    circumstances  of  the  occasion,  anil  of 
The  time  when  this  multitude  was  favoured  with  this  sight. 

To  conclude  ;  I  heartily  join  with  you  in  greatful  acknowl- 
edgements, to  the  Almighty  disposer  of  events,  for  the  man- 
ifestations of  his  universal  benevolence  to  his  ureatures,  and 
especially  unto  man  whom  he  hath  seen  fit  to  induce  with 
the  attributes  of  his  own  nature,  and  constituted  him  an  heir 
of  life  and  immortality.  In  view  of  this,  I  can  be  thankful 
tor  any  faithfulness  discoverable  in  those  who  publish  the 
word  of  life,  and  endeavour  to  defend  it  in  the  spirit  of 
meekness  and  christian  love. 

And  I  will  further  add,  that  1  feel  a  peculiar  pleasure  in 
finding  your  mind  to  be  somewhat  divested  of  its  incumberan- 
ces,  and  that  your  doubts  of  the  grounds  of  your  precious 
faith,  are  dispersing  more  and  more  from  your  mind,  while 
the  evidences  of  divine  truth  find  a  sincere  reception  in  your 
understanding. 

Let  us  endeavour  to  cherish,  not  only  the  evidences  of 
{ruth,  but  truth  itself  in  our  afflictions,  and  in  room  of  being 
idlers  in  the  markets,  go  early  into  our  Lord's  vineyard 
trusting  the  words  of  him  whosaith;  "  whatsoever  is  right, 
ve  shall  receive.5' 

Yours,  kc.  H.  BALLOU, 


EXTRACTS  Not  X. 

11  Dear  sir  and  brother — In  remarking  on  your  replj'  to  my 
8th  number,  as  in  a  former  case  I  shall  follow  the  arrange- 
ment which  you  have  made  ;  taking  up  the  articles  in  the 
same  order. 

u  1st.  1  did  not  suppose  but  that  the  method  which  I  pro- 
posed to  account  for  the  absence  of  the  body  of  Jesus  would 
be  liable  to  serious  objections  ;  and  these  objections  are  in- 
creased by  connecting  with  them,  circumstances  which,  if 
the  resurrection  be  false,  must  be  considered  equally  false. 
Because,  if  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  was  not  a  truth, 
whatever  was  the  truth  on  which  that  belief  was  founded, must 
be  now  all  mere  conjecture. 

"  There  might  be  persons,  however,  who  thought  that 
Jesus  suffered  death  very  wrongfully  although  he  never 
pretended  literally  to  perform  those  miracles.  Yea  I  con- 
ceive it  possible  that  when  this  language  was  first  adopted, 
i.  e.  of  his  feeding  the  hungry,  opening  the  eyes  of  the 
blind,  raising  the  dead,  &c.  it  was  not  understood,  nor  meaot 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  173 

to  be  understood  literally.  Therefore  although  the  ac- 
count at  first  might  have  been  literally  false,  though  not  so 
much  so  as  what  it  grew  to  be  afterward,  yet  it  might  have 
been  considered  spiritually  true  ;  and  therefore  not  designed 
absolutely  to  deceive.  The  only  difficulty,  i.  e.  the  only  ir- 
reconcilable difficulty,  which  I  conceive  in  the  case,  is  in  sup- 
posing that  the  first  disciples  could  be  made  to  believe  in 
the  resurrection,  by  any  evidence  which  could  have  existed, 
and  yet  the  resurrection  not  to  be  true.  But  we  must  sup- 
pose this,  I  think,  in  order  to  raise  a  reasonable  doubt  of  the 
truth  of  the  resurrection.  For,  if  the  disciples  did  not  be- 
lieve it,  they  could  have  had  no  interest  or  motive,  (or  cer- 
tainly no  justifiable  motive)  in  making  others  believe  it  ;  and 
without  this,  it  is  difficult  to  account  even  for  the  existence 
of  such  a  report.  1  should  not  think  it  so  strange,  however, 
that  others,  after  the  report  was  once  in  circulation,  and 
that  even  St.  Paul  himself  should  have  been  made  to  be- 
lieve this,  merely  by  some  visionary  scene. 

"  I  think  therefore  the  question  may  be  reduced  to  this 
point.  Which  of  the  two  is  the  most  incredible,  either  that 
ihe  first  disciples  should  absolutely  believe  in  the  resur- 
rection, by  any  evidence  which  did  not  grow  out  of 
this  truth,  or  that  the  resurrection  should  have  been  abso- 
lutely true  ? 

"  Here  is  where  the  two  propositions,  when  reduced  to 
their  simplicity  must  finally  come.  And  I  contend  that 
when  two  propositions  are  thus  clearly  placed  before  the 
mind  or  understanding,  whether  the  judgment  be  right  or 
wrong,  the  mind  or  understanding  must  reject,  yea  it  is 
impossible  to  avoid  rejecting,  that  which  to  the  mind  or  un 
derstanding,  is  the  most  incredible. 

"  But  when  we  admit  that  the  disciples  did  believe  in  th  i 
resurrection,  we  are  not  obliged  to  admit  that  they  had  all 
or  any  of  the  evidences  of  that  fact  which  have  come  dowj 
to  us.  This  we  may  suppose  might  have  been  mostly  or 
altogether  fictitious  ;  written  by  later  hands,  and  attributed 
to  the  apostles.  And  here  we  must  not  suppose  that  the  ac- 
count was  altogether  made  up  at  once,  but  grew  gradually  ; 
and  not  to  come  out  in  writing  until  the  persons,  who  could 
either  attest  or  deny  the  literal  truth  of  these  facts,  were  ta- 
ken off  of  the  stage.  Here  as  it  respects  the  records  also, 
the  same  question  again  occurs.  Which  is  the  most  incred- 
ible (not  to  say  miraculous,  for  one  miracle  is  no  more  mirac- 
ulous, that  1  know  of  than  another  ;  I  therefore  say  which 
IS* 


174  SERIES   OF    LETTERS. 

is  the  most  incredible)  that  such  histories  should  have  been 
thu9,  or  in  some  other  way  got  up,  and  be  believed,  aliho' 
the  various  accounts,  so  far  as  they  relate  to  miracles,  and 
other  circumstances  necessary  to  be  taken  into  the  account 
only  for  the  sake  of  supporting:  the  truth  of  those  miracles, 
should  have  been  altogether  fictitious,  and  such  parts  only 
true  as  could  be  accounted  for  in  a  rational  way,  without  ad- 
mitting the  existence  of  miracles  ;  or  that  all  those  miracles, 
or  at  least  the  most  essential  of  them,  should  have  been  la- 
terally and  absolutely  true  ?  The  answer  to  these  two 
propositions,  i.  e.  the  above  questions,  will,  and  must,  de- 
cide the  whole  controversy. 

"  Now,  were  it  not  for  the  internal  evidences  which  the 
writing's  of  the  New  Testament  do,  and  ever  will,  possess 
(the  external  evidences  falling  so  far  short  of  being  conclu- 
sive in  my  mind,  as  I  shall  show  more  fully  hereafter,  when 
I  come  to  speak  of  those  evidences)  I  should  still  be  inclin- 
ed, in  my  own  understanding,  to  reject  the  latter  proposition 
in  each  of  the  above  questions,  and  adhere  to  the  former. — 
Much  of  the  external  evidence,  I  am  very  ready  to  admit  is 
perfectly  consistent  with  the  supposed  tiuth  of  the  internal, 
but  after  all,  in  my  humble  opinion,  it  does  not  quite  come  to 
the  point.  But  the  internal  evidence,  I  confess,  I  cannot  with- 
stand. The  more  I  investigate  the  subject,  the  more  I  dis- 
cover its  force,  its  clearness,  and  its  irresistibility  ;  and  al- 
though the  truth  it  unfolds  is  so  august,  so  momentous,  so 
astonishingly  and  inexpressibly  sublime,  that  it  is  with  the 
profoundest  and  most  reverential  awe  I  sneak,  when  I  ac- 
knowledge my  faith  in  the  divine  origin  ;of  those  testimo- 
nies ;  yet,  as  I  cannot  resist  their  force,  so  1  am  obliged  to 
acknowledge  them  true.  The  illusion,  however,  if  it  be  one, 
1  know  is  happifying  to  the  mind  ;  but  this  is  no  good  reason, 
that  I  know  of,  why  we  should  either  embrace  it  ourselves. 
or  propagate  it  in  the  world.  Although  I  have  endeavour- 
ed to  calm  my  conscience,  while  meditating  on  my  doubts, 
with  the  consideration  that  I  am  not  accountable  for  the 
truth  or  the  falsity  of  the  scriptures  ;  yet,  I  must  confess, 
this  did  not  fully  satisfy  my  mind  ;  and  therefore  i  come  to  a 
determination  t©  be  more  thoroughly  persuaded  of  their 
truth,  if  possible,  or  else  be  more  thoroughly  convinced  of 
their  fallacy.  With  this  motive  I  entered  on  the  present 
controversy  ;  and  1  feel  very  happy  in  its  termination, having 
been  much  strengthened  in  my  faith  thereby,  and  humbly 
pray,  that  should  it  ever  come  before  the  public,  it  may  be 
blest  to  the  benefit  of  others. 


SEIES   OF    LETTEa.  175 

;t  2d.  What  you  have  said  on  the  divine  mission,  &£.  of 
the  apostles  is  satisfactory.  For  although  it  has  not  fully 
come  to  my  question,  yet  it  has  had  the  same  good  effect  hy 
convincing  me  that  my  question  went  a  little  beyond  the 
hounds  of  reason  ;  for  it  was  too  much  like  asking  a  blind  man 
how  it  is  that  other  men  see  !  It  is  not  reasonable  to  sup- 
pose that  the  apostles  themselves  could  have  informed  per- 
sons who  were,  uninspired  to  their  oo.de  ret  anting,  how  or 
by  what  means,  they  were  inspired.  It  was  sufficient  to 
demonstrate  the  fact  by  the  works  which  they  were  ena- 
bled to  perform,  (admitting  the  account  true,)  in  the  name 
of  Jesus. 

u  3d.  My  argument  respecting  a  hope  of  future  exis- 
tence has  been  extended  rather  beyond  my  design  With- 
out taking  up  time  to  recapitulate,  I  will  only  say  I  admit 
the  truth  of  your  argument  on  this  subject  ;  neither  do  1  see 
how  it  stands  altogether  in  opposition  to  mine.  What  I 
contend  for  is  this.  The  idea  of  non-existence,  i.  e.  of  exist- 
ing only  in  God,  without  retaining  our  individual  conscious- 
ness of  being,  does  not,  like  the  idea  of  endless  misery,  ab- 
solutely destroy  our  present  comforts.  It  only  cut?  short, 
or  else  prevents,  future  prospects.  If  it  can  be  demonstra- 
ted, as  1  believe  it  can,  that  God  is  good  to  the  animal  crea- 
tion, in  giving  them  existence,  on  the  supposition,  that  they 
have  no  future  state,  I  contend  that  man  is  equally,  if  not 
more  abundantly  blessed,  even  on  the  same  supposition. — 
But  I  never  meant  to  contend  that  eternal  life  would  not  be 
stili  infinitely  better,  according  to  oar  conceptions  of  good, 
if  true.  To  state  a  case,  which  will  illustrate  in  some  de- 
gree my  ideas  of  this  subject,  the  following  may  come 
something  nigh  it  ;  vrz.  I  should  be  pleased  with  the  idea 
of  living,  say,  ten  years,  in  reference  only  to  the  blessing 
of  this  life,  although  I  might  know  I  should  die  at  that  time, 
provided  that,  during  the  ten  years,  I  should  enjoy  the  com- 
mon blessings  of  life.  This  does  not  prevent  my  desiring 
to  live  longer  ;  neither  does  a  certain  knowledge  that  I 
shall  not,  prevent  me  from  desiring  to  live,  nor  from  being 
pleased  with  the  idea  of  living,  till  that  time.  But  let  me 
know  for  a  certainty,  or,  which  would  be  the  same  thing  to 
me,  let  me  absolutely  believe  that  1  should  live  fifty  years, 
and  that  although  the  ten  first  would  be  attended  with  all 
the  common  blessings  of  life,  as  usual,  yet  that  the  remain- 
ing forty  years,  which  would  be  the  remaining  whole  of  my 
natural   life,  1  should    be  placed    in  the  most  distressed  and 


176  SERIES    OF    LETTERS^ 

aggravated  circumstances,  of  which  I  could  possibly  oo>, 
ceive  ;  now,  in  reference  to  the  whole  fifty  years,  could  \ 
desire  to  live  ?  No  !  I  say,  I  rather  choose  instant  death  ! 

"  When  I  look  around  on  the  circumstances  and  condi- 
tion of  men,  I  am  so  fully  convinced  that  the  aggregate  of 
happiness  so  far  overbalances  the  aggregate  of  misery,  that 
I  ani  firmly  of  opinion,  yea,  I  do  not  entertain  the  least  pos- 
srftte  doubt  of  its  truth,  and  therefore  think  I  ever  shall 
end,  that  this  life  is  a  blessing,  and  we  have  abundant 
i  easbn  to  be  very  thankful  for  it,  without  the  least  refer- 
ence to  a  future  state.  But,  nevertheless,  T  am  very  ready 
to  admit,  that,  when  futurity  and  immortality  are  taken  in- 
to the  account,  and  are  connected  with  the  same  view  of  the 
character  of  the  Deity,  these  blessings  are  all  extended  and 
magnified  to  infinity. 

"  But  on  the  supposition  that  truth  is  any  where  connect- 
ed with  endlesmisery^  the  scene  is  wholly  changed.  On  this 
supposition  1  am  not  reconciled  to  truth  at  all ;  I  can  find 
nothing  in  my  moral  nature,  which  I  call  good,  but  what 
stands  directly  opposed  to  it  ;  Hence,  the  very  brightest 
and  most  brilliant  part  of  the  picture  is  deformed  by  the  aw- 
ful idea  ;  it  takes  away  all  the  pleasure  of  investigation,  and 
if  this  be  truth,  my  only  desire  and  prayer  to  God,  is  that 
I  might  be  permitted  to  remain  eternally  ignorant  of  it !  It 
is  my  confidence  therefore  in  the  goodness  of  the  truth,  and 
this  only,  which  has  reconciled  my  mind  to  it.  You  may 
contend  that  I  have  not  obtained  this  confidence  without  the 
knowledge  of  divine  revelation.  Be  that  as  it  may ;  on 
this  supposition  only  I  am  reconciled,  and  something  must 
destroy  this  confidence  before  I  can  become  unreconciled  to 
truth.  I  think  now  I  must  be  fully  understood,  and  wiU 
therefore  add  no  more  on  this  subject. 

"  4th.  What  you  say  under  the  fourth  article  is  satisfactory. 
Errors,  no  doubt,  may  be,  and  often  are  committed  by  apply- 
ing instructions4  differently  from  their  primary  design.* 

"  5th.  Your  remarks  under  the  sixth  article  are  very  ju- 
dicious. Much  injury  no  doubt  is  often  done  to  the  truth  of 
divine  revelation  by  contending  so  tenaciously  as  some  do 
for  things,  which,  if  true,  are  not  essential  to  its  support. — 
It  is  often  the  case  that,  by  trying  to  prove  too  much,  we 
weaken  the  evidence,  in  the  minds  of  many,  respecting  the 
main  thing  we  wish  to  establish.  Hence,  the  opposer,  not 
being  able,  or  else  not  disposed,  to  make  proper  distinction, 
considers  it  all  of  one  price  ;  and  not  being   able  to  see  the 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  177 

propriety  of  many  things,  which  are  contended  for  with 
equal  zeal,  sets  the  whole  down  as  a  fallacy. 

"  6th.  It  is  true, I  thought  you  strained  the  argument  a  lit- 
tle too  far  in  supposing  that  the  apostles  could  not  have  heen 
convinced  of  the  truth  of  the  resurrection  hy  any  evidence 
which  could  be  counterbalanced.  This  induced  me  to  state 
that  supposed  absurdity  in  still  more  glaring  colors,  with  a 
hope  that  you  would  thereby  be  induced  to  take  a  review 
•f  your  argument,  and  not  without  some  expectation,  that 
you  would  be  able  to  see  some  defects  in  il.  But  in  this  I 
have  been  disappointed.  You  still  hold  on  upon  your  argu- 
ment, and  turn  the  error  wholly  on  your  friend. 

liut,  as  this  is  the  turning  point,  I  sh.ill  not  blame  you  for 
straining  every  nerve,  and  holding  on  upon  every  fibre 
which  gives  you  the  least  possible  support. 

"  It  would  not  do  for  you  to  give  up  the  idea  that  the  apos- 
tles could  not  have  been  convinced  of  the  truth  of  the.  res- 
urrection by  any  evidence  which  could  have  existed  short 
of  the  fact's  being  true  ;  (which,  by  the  way,  was  what  I 
meant  by  the  first  member  of  my  criticism,  though  not  ex- 
actly so  expressed  ;)  for  the  moment  this  is  admitted,  doubt 
and  unbelief  will  soon  contend  that  f.hey  were  so  convinced. 
Imagination  may  soon  call  up  such  evidence  in  the  mind, 
without  supposing  any  thing  miraculous,  and  all  the  re*t  of 
the  account  may  be  supposed  to  be  fictitious.  I  did  not 
njean  to  insinuate,  however,  that  you  have  contended  that 
the  apostles  must  have  seen  Jesus  rise  in  order  to  be  con- 
vinced of  the  fact.  I  suppose  their  seeing  him  after  he  was 
risen  was  as  full  demonstration  to  them  as  though  they  had 
seen  him  rise.  And  if  they  could  not  have  been  convinced 
of  its  truth  by  any  thing  short  of  this,  then  they  could  not 
be  convinced  by  any  thing  short  of  the  fact  j  i.  e.  what 
was  the  same  to  them  as  the  fact.  The  second  member  of 
my  criticism,  viz.  l  l[  the  fact  did  exist  there  is  no  evi- 
dence which  can  counterbalance  it,'  does  not,  as  I  conceive, 
suppose  that  you  contend  c  that  the  fact  of  the  resurrection 
could  not  exist  without  proving  itself  to  the  apostles  in  such 
a  way  that  no  evidence  could  counterbalance  it ;'  but  it 
supposes  that  if  the  fact  did  exist,  no  evidence  could  prove 
that  it  did  not  exisf,  as  it  is  always  difficult  to  prove  a  nega- 
tive, and  utterly  impossible  when  the  positive  is  true. — ^ 
Hence  my  conclusion  ;  viz.  As  the  apostles  were  convinc- 
ed of  the~  truth  of  the  resurrection,  which  they  could  not 
have  been  only  by  evidence  which  could  not    have  existed 


178 


SKIES    OF    LKTTES. 


bad  not  the  fact  been  true,  the  fact  did  exist.  How  far  does 
thiscriiicism  fall  short  of  my  other?  (for  it  is  exactlv  what 
I  meant  by  my  other.)  Or  how  far  does  it  go  beyond  your 
argument  ?  Your  words  are,  (see  reply  to  my  sixth  num- 
ber, under  article  third.) 

•*  Finally,  I  cannot  conceive  of  any  evidence  that  could 
sufficiently  support  the  fact  that  Jesus  who  was  crucified,  did 
actually  rise  from  the  dead,  if  nothing  could  be  brought  to 
counterbalance  it,  that  could  possibly  admit  of  being  coun- 
terbalanced ;  and  again.  4  Thus  we  are  brought  to  the  sug- 
gestion, that  any  evidence  which  could  be  sufficient  to 
prove  such  a  fact,  if  no  evidence  appeared  against  it,  must 
be  such  as  admits,  of  no  refutation.' 

11  Unless  it  may  be  reasonably  supposed  that  the  apostles 
were  not  absolutely  so  guarded  against  an  error  of  this 
kind  as  this  argument  suggests,  I  know  of  no  way  to  with- 
stand its  force.  And  I  am  sure  1  feel  no  disposition  to  with- 
stand it,even  against  probability.  It  is  the  improbability  of 
the  fact  it  goes  to  prove,  i.  e.  in  my  mind,  that  ever  induc- 
ed me  to  oppose  it. 

"  I  shall  now  take  notice  of  the  external  evidence  in 
support  of  the  truth  of  divine  revelation,  which  you  have 
quoted  from  Paley  in  his  view  of  the  evidences  of  Chris- 
tianity. 

"  In  your  reply  to  my  seventh  number,  you  mentioned  a 
quotation  from  the  epistle  of  Barnabas,  St.  Paul's  com- 
panion, in  the  following  words,  l  Let  us  therefore,  beware 
lest  it  come  upon  us,as  it  is  v>ritten,there  are  many  called,  few 
chosen.'  The  object  of  this  quotation,  is  to  prove  that  the 
gospel  of  Matthew  (from  which  here  is  a  quotation)  was 
written  before  this  epistle,  and  here  appealed  to  as  to  a  book 
of  divine  authority.  And  although  it  is  perfectly  consis- 
tent with  such  a  supposition,  yet  there  is  great  room  to 
doubt  whether  such  was  the  fact.  Or,  at  least,  there  is 
room  to  conjecture  that  the  gospel  of  Matthew  might  have 
been  written  before  this  epistle,  and  yet  not  written  till  af- 
ter the  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 

"  Speaking  of  the  writers  of  this  period,  Dr.  Priestly 
observes*  i  The  oldest  work  of  the  age,  if  it  had  been 
genuine,  is  that  which  goes  by  the  name  of  The  epistle  of 
Barnabas.  Whoever  was  the  author  of  this  epistle,  it  was 
probably  written  soon  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem. — 
It  abounds    with    interpretations    of  the    Old    Testament 

*Ch.  Hist.  vol.  i.  p.  200. 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  1/9 

which  discover  more  of  imagination,  (han  judgement.'  By 
this  you  will  perceive  that  the  authority  of  this  epistle  is 
doubtful.  I  should  aiso  have  gathered  the  same  idea,  from 
what  Paley  himself  says,  whose  work  1  have  examined,  on 
this  subject,  since  I  wrote  my  last  numher.  It  might  have 
been  written  at  a  much  later  period  than  what  is  supposed 
and  palmed  upon  harnabas  ;  and  therefore  does  not,  as  was 
supposed,  absolutely  prove  that  the  gospel  of  Matthew  wa* 
written  prior  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  It  seems 
that  christians  of  a  later  period  were  in  the  habit  of  palm- 
ing works  upon  their  predecessors;  or  in  other  words,  wri- 
ting in  their  name.  After  speaking  of  the  epistle  of  Clem- 
ens, Priestly  observes  (p.  301)  there  is  extant  another  epis- 
tle ascribed  to  this  Clemens,  but  it  is  evidently  spurious, 
and  was  probably  written  in  the  middle  of  the  third  centu- 
ry. Several  other  writings  were  palmed  upon  him  also, 
especially  the  Apostolical  Constitution  and  the  Clementine 
homilies.  The  epistle  of  Barnabas,  it  seems,  is  first  quoted 
by  Clement  of  Alexandria,  A.  D.  1S4.  This  certainly  give*? 
room  for  my  conjecture.  For  aught  which  appears  to  the 
contrary,  it  might  have  been  written  a  whole  century  after 
the  days  of  the  apostles. 

"  The  next  which  Paley  mentions  is  an  epistie  written  by- 
Clement,  bishop  of  Rome.  This  is  the  same  which  Priest- 
ly calls  Clemens.  '  This  epistle,1  he  says,  l  was  held  in  the 
highest  esteem  by  all  christian!?,  and,  like  the  scriptures, 
was  publicly  read  in  many  churches.'  In  this  epistle  of 
Clement,  you  say, ;  he  quotes  Matt.  v.  7.  xviii.  6.'  But  how 
does  he  quote  those  passages?  Not  as  the  writing  of  Mat- 
thew, but  as  the  words  of  '  our  Lord.'  Although  this  there- 
fore, as  I  have  before  suggested,  is  perfectly  consistent  with 
the  supposed  truth,  it  falls  far  short,  in  my  mind,  of  proving 
that  the  gospel  of  Matthew,  was  written  before  this  epistle. 
Clement  or  Clemens  might  have  written  this  by  tradition 
even  if  he  had  never  seen  the  gospel  of  Matthew,  or  any 
other.  It  only  proves  that  these  words  in  the  gospel  and 
those  in  the  epistle  were  indebted  to  the  same  original 
source,  viz.  the  words  of  Jesus.  I  am  not  disposed  to  dis- 
pute, however,  the  genuineness  of  this  epistle.  "  It  is  an 
earnest  dissuasive,'  says  Priestly,  ;  from  the  spirit  of  fac- 
tion, which  appeared  in  the  church  of  Corinth,  and  which, 
indeed,  was  sufficiently  conspicuous  when  Paul  wrote  his 
epistles.5 

"  Another  work  of  doubtful  authority,'  says  Priestly,   c  is 


180  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

the  Shepherd  of  Henna,  hv  some  thought  to  be  that  Her- 
mes who  is  mentioned  hy  Paul  in  his  epistle  to  the  Romans; 
but  hy  oilier?  supposed  to  he  either  spurious, or  to  have  been 
written  by  a  hter  Hermes,  or  rather  Hermes,  brother  of 
PiuSy  bishop  of  Rome,  about  the  year  1  10.  Whoever  was 
the  author  of  this  work  (and  though  it  was  so  much  esteem- 
ed by  manv  christians,as  to  he  publicly  read  in  their  churches) 
it  is  certainly  a  very  poor  performance.'  If  this  work 
therefore  he  of' so  late  a  date,  as,  according  to  this  account, 
it  may  he,  and,  from  all  which  appears  to  the  contrary,  we 
may  presume  it  is,  as  the  first  quotation  of  it  is  by  Irenaeus, 
A.  D.  178,  it  fails  short  of  the  proof  we  want. 

The  same  observations  will  apply  to  the  allusions  to  the 
gospels  in  the  epistles  of  Ignativs,  as  was  mentioned  in  re- 
gard to  the  epistle  of  Clement.  They  are  not  literal  quo- 
tations, and  therefore  might  have  been  only  traditions.  I 
consider  them  no  certain  proof  that  the  gospels  were  writ- 
ten previous  to  this  time.  Though  it  is  very  natural  to 
suppose*  that  to  have  been  the  (act.  The  same  will  apply  to 
the  epistle  of  Polycarp,  as  we  know  not  exactly  what  was 
meant  at  that  time  by  the  scriptures  ;  neither  do  allusions  to 
certain  passage?  in  the  scriptures,  especially  such  as  the 
words  of  Jesus,  prove  the  existence  of  these  scriptures  at 
that  time. 

u  In  the  time  of  Eusebius  there  were  extant  Jive  books  of 
Pupias,  bishop  o/HierapoIis  in  Syria,  of  the  interpretation  of 
the  divine  oracles.  4  Papias,'  says  Priestly,  8  was  a  great 
collector  of  the  sayings  of  the  apostles  ■  and  one  of  the  tra- 
ditions preserved  by  him  was  that,  after  the  resurrection, 
Christ  would  reign  upon  earth  a  thousand  years,  an  opinion 
which,  from  his  authority,  was  long  respected  by  many.'* 
Papias,  it  seems,  is  the  first  who  speaks  of  the  gospels  by 
name,  and  he  mentions  only  Matthew  and  Mark.  That  all 
the  gospels,  however,  existed  in  his  day,  and  also  bore  the 
names  which  they  now  do,  I  should  not  be  disposed  to  dis- 
pute ;  neither  is  there  any  thing  to  contradict  the  idea  of 
their  being  written  by  the  persons  reputed  to  be  the  authors 
of  them  ;     But, 

"  Supposing  a  few  of  these  first  bishops  had  taken  it  into 
ther  heads  ;  having  susceeded  so  well,  during  a  little  respite 
from  persecution,  in  consequence  of  those  troublesome 
times  at  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  as  to  get  appointed  to 
their  respective  offices,   and  thinking  it  would  tend  greatly 

*Ch.  lint.  vol.  i.  p.  203  Euseb.  Hiet.  Lib.  iii.  Cap.  39  p.  135. 


'VERlfeS    OF    LETi'ERS.  131 

;..j  their  future  success,  I  say,supposing  they  had  taken  it  into 

r  their  heads   to  write  the  four  gospels  and  the  acts  of  the 

"apostles  themselves,  embracing-  all  the  traditions,  which  they 

knew,  of  the   apostles,  dressed   up  in  the  figurative  stylein 

which  those  things,  even  from  the  first,  had  been    reported. 

together  with   many  fictions  of    their  own.     And  that  they 

did  write  these  books  in  the  name    of  the  apostles;  who 

would  be  likely,  or  would  be  able,  to  contradict  them  ?    "Or 

supposing,  without  any  previous  concert,  some  one   should 

have  written  the  gospel  of  Matthew  ;  another,  after  haying 

seen  it,  should  write  one  in  the  name  of  Mark  ;  a  third,  who 

"llad  seen  them  both,  should  write  that  of  Luke,  and  the  acts 

of  the  apostles  r  and  a  fourth  should  write  that  of  John.— 

These,  of  course,  would  make  their  first  appearance  at.  dit- 

'  ferent  times,   and  indifferent  parts  of  the  country;  or,;in 

;  other   words,  in   different  countries.     Some  story  or  other 

might  have  been  got   up,   in  regard  to  their  first   discovery, 

which  should  go  currently   with  the  common  people,    and 

which,    after  the  works  were  received  as  canonical,  would 

•of  course  be  done  away. 

"As  a  justification  of  the  above  hypothesis  (which  I  am 
very  sensible  is  not  without  its  difficulties)  in  addition  to 
whatlhave  said  in  regard  to  the  writings  palmed  upon  Clem- 
ens, I  will  mention  the  following  from  Priestly's  Ch.  Hist. 
vol.  ii.  p.  412.  ft  appears  to  have  been  a  quotation  from 
Sozomen,  by  Socrates,  Lib.  vii.  chap.  19,  p.  307.  "  The  rev- 
elation of  Peter,  '  which  is  rejected  as  a  spurious  book  by 
c  the  ancients,  is  read  once  every  year  in  some  chnrchesrin 
4  Palestine  on  good  Friday,  which  is  a  religious  fast  in  com- 
/  memo'ration  of:  our  Lord's  sufferings.  The  book  that  is 
"  called  the  revelation  of  the  apostle  Paul,  which  was  unknown 
• J  to  the  ancients,  is  greatly  commended  by  many  of  the 
* ;  monks.  Some  say  that  this  book  was  first  found  in  the 
4  reign  of  Theodosius.  For  they  say  that  in  the  house  of 
4  Paul  at  Tarsus,  there  was  a  marble  chest  in  a  subterane- 
4  ous  place,  in  which  this  book  was  deposited,  and,  that  it 
*  was  discovered  by  a  particular  revelation.' 

"  Any  work  of  this  kind,  got  up  at  so  late  a  period,  as  that 
of  the  reign  of  Theodosius,  would  not  be  likely  to  be  gen- 
erally received  among  the  churches ;  yet  if  it  could  be  re- 
ceived by  any,  why  might  not  a  similar  work,  or  similar 
works,  which  made  their  appearance  so  soon  after  "the  apos- 
tles, as  mi<rht  well  be  supposed  to  have  befefi  written  b'rtnVm 
and  When  tod,  the  churches  were  few  in ouniberv  with SuH ho 
16 


182  SERIES   OF    LETTERS. 

least  suspicion  of  fraud,  have  been  received  by  all  ?  Or  if  any 
fraud  had  been  suspected,  yet,  believing  in  the  main  thing 
which  all  these  were  designed  to  support,  those  frauds  what- 
ever they  were,  might  have  been  considered  really  pious  ! 

"  But,  sir,  you  will  perceive  that  I  am  not  altogether 
pleased,  nor  fully  satisfied,  with  this  argument.  I  know  it 
has  its  difficulties  ;  but  the  question  is,  whether  it  has  great- 
er than  the  one  which  it  is  brought  to  oppose  ?  The  question 
is  not,  whether  these  things  look  probable  ?  For  I  acknowl- 
edge they  do  not  look  probable.  But  the  question  is,  which 
is  the  most  incredible  ;  either  that  the  above  hypothesis,  or 
something  like  it,  should  be  true  ;  or  else  that  the  extraor- 
dinary miracles,  related  in  the  books  refered  to,  should  be 
true  ?  If  there  were  no  better  evidence  in  favor  of  the  mir- 
acles than  that  which  I  have  been  examining,  I  should  be 
obliged  to  decide  against  the  latter,  let  me  think  what  I 
might  respecting  the  former.  The  most  that  we  can  say  of 
this  testimony  is,itdoes  not  contradict  the  truth  of  those  histo- 
ries, but,  so  far  as  it  goes,  it  is  perfectly  consistent  with  the 
truth  of  the  main  question.  The  weight  of  this  testimony 
therefore,  whatever  it  is,  seems  to  be  on  the  side  of  the 
truth  of  Christianity.     Buf, 

"  What  carries  the  most  conviction  to  my  mind  is  not,  who 
wrote  those  books  ;  not  the  manner  in  which  they  have  been 
handed  down  to  us,  nor  in  which  they  can  now  be  traced  to 
the  apostles  ;  but  the  manner  in  which  the  story  itself  is  told. 
It  must  be  confessed  that,  excepting  a  few  things,  which 
may  be  supposed  to  have  been  early  interpolations,  it  car- 
ries in  it  all  the  internal  marks  of  truth.  When  this  is  ad- 
mitted, we  must  also  admit  the  propriety  of  bringing  in  these 
external  evidences,  as  auxiliaries ;  and  when  we  find  that 
they  also,  instead  of  being  contradictery  to,  are  perfectly 
consistent  with,  the  supposed  truth,  they  add,  not  a  little,  to 
the  weight  of  testimony.  Hence  we  find  that  our  faith  is 
strengthened  by  the  consideration  of  circumstances,  which 
would  not  have  been  sufficient,  in  themselves  alone,  to  have 
originated,  or  produced,  that  faith.  The  question  may  be 
still  asked,  why  do  you  now  believe  ?  To  which  I  give  this 
plain  and  simple  answer.  It  is  because,  notwithstanding  the 
incredibility  of  the  miracles  of  Christ,  and  of  the  apostles, 
and  the  resurrection,  the  truth  of  which,  these  miracles  go 
to  confirm  and  substantiate ;  yet,  the  idea  that  this  story 
should  ever  have  been  told  in  the  manner  it  is,  without  hav- 
ing truth  for  its  foundation,  in  spite  of  all  my  incredibility,  i* 


SERIES   OF   LETTERS.  183 

still  more  ' incredible  !  And  it  is  my  humble  opinion  that 
whoever  will  give  themselves  the  trouble,  to  pay  the  same 
attention  to  the  subject,  must  be  of  the  same  opinion  :  for, 
I  am  inclined  to  think  that  no  one  has  been  more  predispos- 
ed to  unbelief.  Not,  that  I  ever  felt  any  real  opposition  to 
the  truth  of  the  holy  scriptures,  as  I  now  understand  them, 
but  I  did  not  wish  to  be  deceived.  I  had  rather  that  my 
hopes  and  expectations  should  never  be  raised,  than  to  have 
them  raised  upon  a  fruitless  or  spurious  foundation.  But,  af- 
ter all, 

u  It  will  be  perceived  that  I  make  no  pretensions  to  a  mv> 
raculous,  or  mysterious,  conversion.  My  conversion,  what- 
ever it  is,  is  altogether  rational.  It  grows  out  of  the  evidence 
which  I  plainly  have  before  my  eyes.  And  it  is  my  humble 
opinion  that  those  who  pretend  to  such  conversions  ought  to 
be  able  to  confirm  the  same  by  miracles,  the  same  as  the 
truth  was  first  confirmed  ;  and  unless  they  can  do  it,  it  ought 
to  be  considered  as  nothing  more  than  mere  pretension. — 
According  to  the  ideas  of  some,  and  of  much  too  of  that 
which  is  termed  orthodox,  every  conversion  is  as  much  a 
miracle  as  was  the  resurrection  of  Christ.  But  as  this  is  a 
fact,  which  if  true,  is  entirely  out  of  sight  of  the  unconvert- 
ed, and  of  which  they  can  form  no  conception,  nor  judge  of 
it  in  any  sense  whatever,  is  it  not  reasonable  that  they 
should  have  a  demonstration  of  its  truth,  by  some  fact,  of 
the  truth  of  which  they  can  judge,  that  they  may  know  that 
the  work  is  of  God  ?  And  until  we  have  such  demonstra- 
tion, may  we  not  consider  all  such  pretensions  to  be  of  men  ? 

"  With  these  remarks  I  hasten  to  a  Conclusion. 

"  In  taking  leave  of  this  subject,  considering  it  probable 
that  these  letters  will,  at  some  future  time,  come  before  the 
public,  it  is  but  just  that  I  should  more  fully  avow  my  mo- 
tives in  this  controversy.  You  will  have  perceived,  all 
along,  the  ground  on  which  I  stood.  I  have  endeavoured 
to  personate  an  honest  inquirer  after  truth  ;  but  one  who 
was  filled  with  doubts  concerning  every  thing  of  which 
there  is  not  positive  demonstration.  How  far  1  have  acted 
up  to  such  a  character,  you  and  the  public  can  best  judge. 
I  thought,  however,  I  should  be  the  most  likely  to  do  this, 
by  bringing  those  objections,  and  those  only,  which,  at 
one  time  or  another,  have  occupied  my  own  mind.  But, 
that  the  controversy  might  not  appear  as  a  mere  farce,  or 
like  a  man  raising  objections  against  himself  (in  which  case 
he  generally  takes  care  to  raise  none  but  what  he  thinks  he 


ran.,  answer)  and   that  I  might  engage  alA  yon^^tef^t- a nu. 
energy  on  the  subject,  I  have  carried  the  idea,  through  the. 
whole,   both  by  my  letters  and  by    my  private  conversation 
n-iih  you  during  .the. time  (as  yo,u  -very"  well  .know)  that  those  [ 
ejections   were  now  laboring,  in  my,  mind  with  fj ail    their 
force.     I  have  therefore, endeavoured  to  dispute  every  inch,. 
ofc  ground,  and  give  way  only,  as  I  found  myself  obliged  to.', 
give  way,  by  the   force  of  jour,   arguments.     That  ,1  have  - 
apt  acted  my  part  better  must.be  imputed  to  want  of  ability. . 
and  hot  to  want  of  good  will.     1  have  endeavoured  to  throw,r 
ey^y^ block- in. your  way  which  1  could",  think ..of,  without  de-' 
v  iating  from  the  character  which.  I  had  assumed  ;t  and ,%a>,v 
1  nave  not  made  your  task  /more   arduous^  js 'because  I  did  . 
not  see  how  I  could -do  it  witlio.utbel.raying  a  .manifest  q^L 
esty  on  my  part.     Tbe: result  is  such  as. f.ajiUcipateu. 

'-.IJy  real  motive  mu^t  be  pj  only  apojogy;for  i)>e  p^art  I,; 
1  ave  taken.     You  know  thai  no  work  .pf ..the. :kino\ has,  ej 
Leon  really  and  seriously  .attempted  by  any  one  who  is.  a-. 
o-diy  of  our  order j  that  our  religious  opponent?  are  cc:.. 
i;a-]y  throwing  the  gauntlet  of  asp  ergons,  at  ^as^elng  njo^-*. 

:.ig  more  |J^B^e^fiftifav^ite&B^¥^fefe,rt  ipiSSi 

*,jPi  j^te-'in.qlsguise.  '7To  fi^^^mpf^^f^j^g^s^ 
.$,  well  as;  toilet  tlie'.unbeiievin^  world  Juvow^cmit  views.Jcn" 
object, "I thought  a  work  of  this",  kind  vv as. 1  really,  need-,', 
eJt  And  it  appeared  to  me  that  the  work,  in  the  first  place,. * 
would  be  more  likely  to  be  read,  and,  in  the  end,  more  sure. 
of  success,  to'  have  it  come  forth  by  the", way  of  controversy, 
than,  what  it  would  in  any  other. way." 

"It  is    true,  i  may   not  have  "brought   all  the  objections 
wJjich  some  woulo!  wish  to  have  brought ;  but  if  what' I  have 
"brought  are  so  far  removed  as  not  to  remain  a  serious  ohsta-, 
cle  in  the  mind  of  candid  readers  (which  I  conclude  will  be  ! 
the  case,   with    others,  as  it  is  wim  me)   then. all  objections  : 
may.  be  as  easily  removed. 

•J  That  this  work  may  he  an  instrument, in  the.  hands  of  God,  . 
of.  removing  the  prejudices  from  the  minds  of  many  of  our 
religious,  opponents,  of  strengthening  the  faith  of  many  who 
aije  wavering,  and,  as  it  were,  halting  between  two  opinions, 
and  of  calling  up  the  attention  of  those  who,  like  Gallis, 
-  care  for  none  of  these  things,'  is  the  sincere  prayer  of 
iC  Yours  in  the  bonds  of  the  gospel, 

"  A.  kAeELAND.- 


SERIES   OF    LETTERS.  1$$ 

LETTER  IX. 

Dear  sir,  and  brother, — A  careful  perusal  of  your  tenth 
number  has  given  me  much  satisfaction,  and  seems  to  sug- 
gest that  my  reply  may  be  general.  You  discover  the  ra- 
tional ground  on  which  your  scruples  are  removed,  and  state 
no  difficulty  that  you  do  not  surmount. 

T  agree  with  you,  that  the  gloomy  doctrine  of  eternal 
misery,  when  by  the  imagination  it  becomes  incorporated 
into  the  system  of  divine  revelation,  "  reverses  the  whole 
scene,"  and  renders  that,  which  in  its  divine  and  native 
beauty  possesses  the  most  powerful  attractions,  the  most  de- 
formed picture  that  ever  repelled  the  human  affections.  It 
is  this  heaven-dishonouring  doctrine,  so  repugnant  to  and  ir- 
reconcilable with  the  known  goodness  of  God  manifested  to 
all  nations  in  his  divine  providence,  that  has,  more  than  any 
thing  else,  so  buffeted  all  the  best  feelings  of  man,  as  in 
thousands  of  instances  to  drive  the  heart  of  benevolence  to 
lay  aside  the  scriptures  to  whose  authority  this  unmerciful 
doctrine  has  been  erroneously  ascribed. 

But  let  the  scriptures  be  once  considered  as  free  from  the 
above  horrible  sentiment  as  in  reality  they  are,  they  will 
then  perfectly  correspond  with  the  demonstrations  of  uni- 
versal benevolence  and  grace,  rendered  conspicuous  in  all 
the  ways  of  God  ;  they  will  also  compare  as  a  perfect  trans- 
cript of  that  inward  light  and  love  which  renders  man  an  im- 
age of  his  ever  adorable  Creator. 

As  the  christian  church  emerges  from  the  city  of  mystery 
Babylon  and  its  suburbs,  and  advances  into  the  light  of  the 
wisdom  of  God,  the  doctrine  above  mentioned  loses  its  influ- 
ence and  its  votaries ;  nor  will  it  be  in  the  power  of  our  self- 
styled  orthodox  clergy,  long  to  chain  the  public  mind  to  such 
a  forbidding  absurdity. 

Nothing  discovers  the  deplorable  state  of  depravity,  to 
which  the  human  mind  is  subject,  by  force  of  tradition,  more 
than  the  unnatural  and  absurd  notion  of  enhancing  future 
bliss,  by  beholding  fellow  creatures  of  the  nearest  connexion 
in  a  state  of  indescribable  misery,  there  to  remain  time  with- 
out end  ! 

It  seems  to  us  astonishing  that  parents  were  ever  capable 

of  causing  their  children  to  pass  through  the  fire  to  an  idol, 

but  what  is  this  compared  with  what  our  pious  fathers  and 

mothers  have  believed  concerning  their  children's  suffering? 

16* 


1#6  SER1E&  OF    LETTERS. 

in  the  eternal  world,  for  the  glory  of  that  God  who  is  the 
Father  of  the  spirits  of  all  flesh  ? 

Tradition  makes  the  most  horrible  things  acceptable  to 
the  mind  which  becomes  blind  to  their  deformity,  and  even 
the  most  detestable  things,  desirable,  by  a  certain  feigned 
sanctity  which  it  attaches  to  them.  But  the  charm  once 
broken,  the  rational  mind  becomes  transformed  into  another 
image?  totally  different,  and  entirely  repugnant  to  the  things 
which  it  before  venerated  as  divine.  _  You  very  justly  re- 
mark, that  if  truth  be  in  any  way  connected  with  endless 
misery,  you  are  not  reconciled  to  it;  but  the  time  has  been  . 
when  you  and  1  viewed  this  doctrine  as  an  essential  article  of 
the  faith  of  the  gospel..  What  an  absurdity  !  Eternal  mis- 
ery an  essential  article  of  the  faith  of  a  Saviour  ! 

And  this  very  moment  there  are  thousands  who  set  their 
feei   on  this  vagary,  believing  it  to  be  the  only    rock  ot\ 
safety. 

But  we  have  reason  to  be  thankful  for  .our  happy  deliver- 
ance from  such  a  pernicious  tradition  ;  a  tradition  which  has 
poisoned  the  doctrine  of  the  church,  and  hardened  the  hearts 
o£  christian  professors  to.  such  a  degree,  that  cruelty  of  the 
worst  kind  has  become  habitual. 

Will  our  pious  clergy  contend  against  this  charge  ?     Let 
them  account  then  for  all  the  persecutions,  the  anathemas, 
the  hangings  and  the  burnings,  which  owe  their  origin  to 
this  doctrine  of  eternal  misery,     Let  them  account  for  their 
own  sermons,  in  our  day,  which  sentence  age,  middle  age, 
and -infancy  to  endless  torture,  for  o.ffeuces  they  never  heard 
of,  nor  will  they  ever  be  informed  of  them  until  they  find, 
themselves  in  hell  for  what  a  man  anda  woman  did  thousands  . 
of  years  before  they  were  born,  and  of  whom  they  never, 
hacl  heard  one  word  in  the  land  of  the  living- !     This  they  as  - 
constantly  preach  as  they  contend  that  man  musi  be  sensible 
of  bis  fall  in  Adam,  of  the  -justice  of  his  being  eternally  mis- 
erable for  that  offence,  and  of  pardon. through  the  atonement, 
e£Christ.in  this  life,  or  be  miserable  forever  hereafter  ;  for  . 
thousands  in  all  ages  have  lived  and  died,  who  never  heard   • 
this  absurd  story  while  on  earth. 

Sir,  we  have  no  reason  to  wonder  that  religion  is  so  little 
set  by,  while  it  is  held  up. in  such  a  character.  Let  it  put  on 
the  mild  form  of  the  meek  and  humble  Jesus,  let  it.  appear.- 
in  the  mercy  of  him  who  said;  "  the  son  of  man  came  not 
to  destroy  raeivs  lives  hut  to  save  them,,:  let  it  be  represent- 
ed.!^ its  own  similitude,  by  pouring  oil  and  wine  into  the 


SERIES   OF   LETTERS  181 

wounds  of  an  enemy,  let  it  be  heard  when  it  declares  in 
apostolic,  language;  God . "  will  have  all  men  to  be  saved^ 
and  to  come  unto  the  knowledge  of  the  truth,"  let  its  lan- 
guage be  strictly  regarded  when  it  informs  us  that  charity  is 
greater  than  faith  or  hope,  then  it  will  be  pure  and  undent- 
ed before  God  and  the  Father;  it  will  engage  the  best  affec- 
tions of  the  human  heart,  and  call  to  its  devotion  all  the  en- 
ergies of  man.  Who  can  count  the  damages  which  have 
been  occasioned  by  the  preposterous  error  of  setting  up 
faith  as  a  criterion  of  charity  ?  Creed  makers  and  creed  de- 
fenders surely  must  have  been  averse  to  St.  Paul's  senti- 
ment concerning  the  superiority  of  charity  over  faith  ;  for 
they  have  sat,  charity  at  defiance  with  undefined  items  in 
their  creeds,  which  were  acknowledged  mysterious  in  their 
own  minds,  and  evidently  repugnant  to  reason  in  the  judg- 
ment of  those  who  were  proscribed  as  heretics  by  their  au- 
thor ity, 

Relative  to  my  quotations  from  the  epistle  of  Barnabas 
and  others,  your  argument,  as  far  as  it  is  intended  to  lessen 
our  belief  in  the  genuineness  of  those  epistles,  has  no.  direct 
bearing  on  the  argument  which  I  endeavoured  to  support  by 
them;  for  it  makes  no  difference  who  wrote  those  epistles,  it 
is  their  containing  quotations  from  the  New  Testament 
which,  gives  them  the  consequence  for  which  they  were 
quoted. 

In   rcpJy  to  what  you  say  respecting  Clement's  not  quot-  . 
ing  Mat.  v.  7.  xviii.  G.  as  the  writing  of  St.  Matthew,  but  as 
the  words  of"  our  Lord,"  I  here  set  down  Paley's  answer. 

••  It  may  be  said,  that,  as  Clement  hath  not  used  words  of  , 
quotation,  it  is. not  certain  that  he  refers  to   any  book  what- 
ever.    The   words  of  Christ,,  which  he  has  put  down,  he 
might  himself  have  heard  from  the  apostles,  or  might  have  i 
received  them  through  the  ordinary  medium  of  oral  tradi-  • 
tiqn.     This   has  been  said:   hut  that  no  such  inference^  can  . 
be  drawn  from   the  absence  of  words  o«  quotation  is  proved 
by.  the  three  following  considerations  :— First,  that  Clement  . 
in  the  very  same  manner,  namely,  without  any  mark  of  re- 
ference, uses  a  passage  now  found  in  the  epistle  to  the  Ro- 
mans ;*  which    passage  from  the   peculiarity  of  the  words  , 
which  compose  it,  and  frcm  their  order,  it  is  manifest  that  he 
must   have   taken  from    the,  book.     The  same  remark  may 
be  repeated  of  some  very  singular  sentiments. in  the  epistle 
io.the  Hebrews.    Secondly  "that  there  :;rc  ir.-.ry  ^e:itv: 
•  Ro:r..  i.  29.  .      .  .  -.   > 


188  SERIES   OF   LETTERS. 

of  St.  Paul's  epistle  to  the  Corinthians  standing  in  Clement's 
epistle  without  any  sign  of  quotation,  which  yet  are  certain- 
ly quotations  ,•  because  it  appears  that  Clement  had  St. 
Paul's  epistle  before  him,  inasmuch  as  in  one  place  he  men- 
tions it  in  terms  too  express  to  leave  us  in  any  doubt — '  Take 
into  your  hands  the  epistle  of  the  blessed  apostle  Paul.' 
Thirdly,  that  this  method  of  adopting  words  of  scripture, 
without  reference  or  acknowledgment,  was,  as  will  appear 
in  the  sequel,  a  method  in  general  use  among  the  most  an- 
cient christian  writers.  These  analogies  not  only  repel  the 
objection,  but  cast  the  presumption  on  the  other  side;  and 
afford  a  considerable  degree  of  positive  proof  that  the  words 
in  question  have  been  borrowed  from  the  places  of  scripture 
in  which  we  now  find  them.7'* 

I  think,  if  we  take  into  consideration  the  authority  of  ex- 
ternal evidence,  especially  if  we  duly  consider  how  easily 
Celsus  could  have  overthrown  the  gospels,  if  they  had  not 
been  genuine,  it  must  be  acknowledged  sufficient,  even  of 
itself,  to  establish  any  matter  of  fact  however  important, 
allowing  no  natural  improbability  were  involved  in  the  fact. 
And  this  is  as  much  as  we  want  of  external  evidence,  of  the 
sort  refered  to. 

But  as  even  the  internal  evidences  of  scripture  would  be 
insufficient  to  support  their  authority  without  the  concur- 
rence of  external  evidence,  so  would  the  external  be  found 
wanting  without  the  internal.  But  these  together  are  abun- 
dantly sufficient  to  establish  the  credibility  of  this  gospel, 
which  is,  like  every  thing  else  of  the  work  and  wisdom  of 
God,  the  wonder  and  admiration  of  the  believing  soul. 

The  purity  of  your  motives  in  writing  on  the  subject  of 
our  discussion,  will  fully  justify  the  exertions  you  have  made 
to  draw  forth  such  arguments  as  your  brother  has  been  ena- 
bled to  adduce  in  support  of  our  common  faith.  I  regret 
that  my  almost  constant  employ  on  other  subjects  and  other 
duties,  has  afforded  so  little  time  as  I  have  been  able  to  de- 
vote to  your  queries,  which,  together  with  my  want  of  abili- 
ties to  do  justice  to  a  subject  of  this  importance  is  now  an 
embarrassment  on  my  mind  in  regard  to  giving  my  consent 
to  the  publication  of  this  correspondence.  And  there  is  still 
another  circumstance  which  seems  to  operate  as  an  objec- 
tion tv  the  publishing  of  these  letters,  viz.  the  want  of  exten- 
sion of  argument  in  many  instances,  which  would  have  been 
attended  to,  if  the  work  had  been  written  for  the  conviction 
*  Paley's  Evidences,  p.  109,  110. 


I 


SEIES    OF    LETTER  189 

of  common  readers,  which  was  not  thought  to  be  necessary 
for  the  benefit  of  the  mover  of  the  queries. 

However,  as  all  human  productions  are  imperfect  and 
ought  so  to  be  considered,  and  especially  those  from  your 
humble  servant,  I  am  willing  to  appear  to  some  disadvan- 
tage if  any  considerable  advantage  may  thereby  result  to 
the  cause  of  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord. 

I  cannot  close  this  valedictory  epistle  without  a  solemn 
acknowledgement  of  heart  felt  gratitude  to  the  merciful 
disposer  of  all  events,  for  the  ample  evidence  which  hi9 
providence  and  grace  have  given  of  the  truth  of  our  religion, 
especially  when  consider  the  glorious  hope  set  before  us  ; 
and  am  permitted  to  anticipate  the  promised  era  when  there 
shall  be  no  more  death,  neither  sorrow  nor  crying  ;  when 
there  shall  be  no  more  pain  ;  but  when  tears  shall  be  wiped 
from  all  faces,  and  the  rebuke  of  the  nations  removed  from 
off  all  the  earth,  and  every  creature  in  heaven,  and  on  the 
earth,  and  under  the  earth,  and  such  as  are  in  the  sea  shall 
harmoniously  ascribe  blessing,  and  glory,  and  honor  uuto 
him  who  sitteth  upon  the  throne  and  unto  the  lamb  forever 
and  ever,  I  loose  myself  in  the  contemplation  of  the  trans- 
porting scene. 

To  conclude,  as  you,  my  brother,  have  laboured  together 
with  your  fellow  servant,  to  look  into,  and  examine  these- 
things  which  belong  to  the  kingdom  of  righteousness,  and 
as  we  have  been  favoured  with  mutual  satisfaction  in  these 
researches,  may  it  please  the  Great  Head  of  the  chnrch 
still  to  hold  us  in  his  hand,  still  to  engage  us  in  his  blessed 
cause,  and  render  our  mutual  labours  promotive  of  his  grace 
among  men.  And  however  distant  from  each  other  it  may 
best  suit  the  captain  of  our  salvation  to  place  us,  may  it  be. 
his  pleasure  to  continue  our  fellowship  in  the  bonds  of  the 
gospel. 

Yours  aflfectionatelv,  H.  BAJ  T 


SERIES  OF  LETTERS 


BETWEEN  THE 


Rev.  JOSEPH  BUCKMINSTER.  D.  D 


THE 


Rev.  JOSEPH  WALTON,  A.  M. 

I 
PASTORS  OF  CONGREGATIONAL  CHURCHES  IN  PORTSMUOTH,  N.  K 


AXD  THE 


Rev.  HOSBA  BALLOU. 


boston: 

GRISTED  AND  PUBLISHED  BY  HENRY  EOWEN,  CONflRESS-ST. 
1820. 


3J  10  I        roTP 


•-- 


• 


•  n 


A  SERIES  OF  LETTERS. 

LETTER  I. 

flfom  the  rev.  joseph  eucixmixster  to  the  rev.  hosea  ballol . 

Portsmouth,  Dec.  28,  1809. 

Dear  Sir, — At  the  close  of  the  interview  which  we  had  at 
my  house,  some  little  time  since,  you  expressed  a  wish  to 
live  in  habits  of  friendship  with  the  ministers  of  this  town, 
and  I  think  I  expressed  a  hope  that  I  should  be  always  dis- 
posed to  treat  you  and  all  men  with  those  fruits  of  benevo- 
lence and  friendship  which  the  law  of  our  common  nature 
and  the  spirit  and  principles  of  the  christian  religion,  demand 
of  me  ;  with  this  profession,  without  its  fruits,  my  conscience 
is  not  satisfied.  It  was  neither  friendship  nor  piety  that  dic- 
tated that  early  question,  u  Am  J  my  brother's  keeper  ?" — 
There  is  a  reciprocal  responsibility  among  mankind,  both 
for  the  interest  of  time  and  eternity.  Were  I  to  see  you  or 
•  any  others  exposing  themselves  to  danger,  or  running  into 
situations  that  1  apprehend  would  be  prejudicial  and  des- 
tructive, friendship  would  require  me  to  warn  and  admonish, 
and  endeavour  to  restra.n  ;  and  can  1  support  my  preten- 
sions to  this  principle  in  withholding  my  warning  and  admo- 
nition, while  I  am  verily  persuaded  thrU  jhe  present  tenden- 
cy and  final  issue  of  that  system  of  sentiments  which  you 
have  embraced,  and  which  you  have  come  among  us  to  ad- 
vocate and  to  support,  will  expose  you,  unH  thosp  0 -it  em- 
brace and  build  upon  it,  to  danger  and  distress,  with  which 
no  temporal  calamity  or  ruin  can  bear  any  sort  oi  compari- 
son ? 

I  know  not  what  system  of  Universalism  jou  have  em- 
braced or  advocate,  n^r  is  i(  of  any  material  consequence  in 
my  view;  I  presume  I  do  not  mistake  or  injure  you  in  sup- 
posing that  you  publicly  preach  and  advocate  tho  final  salva- 
tion of  all  mankind, their  restoration  and  association  with  Je- 
sus Christ  in  realm*  of  glory.  Whatever  human  ingenuity 
or  plausible  and  sophistic  reasoning  may  do  with  respect  tc> 

n 


i94  SERIES   OP   LETTERS. 

oither  of  these  systems,  they  each  and  all  of  them  are,  pa 
my  view,  destitute  of  divine  authority,  and  have  not  a  "  thus 
saith  the  Lord,"  for  their  support. 

There  may  be  some  little  difference  in  the  present  ten- 
dency and  effect  of  these  different  systems  upon  the  present 
conduct  of  men,  and  so  upon  the  interest  of  society  ;  but  in 
their  general  influence,  and  in  their  final  results,  they  meet 
in  the  same  point,  and  will  be  attended  with  the  same  dread- 
ful consequences.  They  are  neither  of  them  true,  and  so 
can  have  no  effect  in  quickening  into  life  or  sanctifying  the 
soul,  for  it  is  the  spirit  that  quickeneth,  and  the  truth  that 
.'.anctifieth  ;  they  may  exhilarate,  please,  and  produce  tri- 
umph ;  but  it  will  be  a  triumphing  that  is  short,  and  a  joy 
that  is  but  for  a  moment ;  for  God,  to  my  apprehension,  has 
been  so  far  from  giving  any  countenance  to  either  of  those 
systems,  that  he  hath  long  ago  pronounced  them  false^and 
their  tendency  destructive — these  are  his  words  :  u  Because 
with  lies  ye  have  made  the  hearts  of  the  righteous  sad,  whom  I 
have  not  made  sad,  and  strengthened  the  hands  of  the  wicked, 
that  he  should,  not  return  from  his  wicked  way  by  promising 
him  life?"*  But  it  is  not  my  intention  to  enter  into  a  dispute 
upon  this  subject,  neither  to  enlarge  upon  arguments  to  sup- 
port my  own  sentiments,  nor  to  disprove  yours;  I  have  no 
apprehension  that  any  good  would  result  from  it ;  it  would 
be  a  tax  upon  time  that  might  be  better  employed. 

When  persons  have  adopted  a  system  and  are  engaged  in 
its  support,  when  the  pride,  of  peculiarity  or  the  influence 
of  party  views  are  enlisted  as  auxiliaries,  there  is  little 
ground  to  hope  for  a  conviction  of  its  errors  by  formal  dis- 
putation, however  temperately  conducted  ;  nothing  will  ef- 
fect a  change  of  views  and  feelings  but  "  that  still  small  voice" 
which  induced  the  prophet  to  wrap  his  face  in  his  mantle  : 
This  voice  is  more  likely  to  attend  our  calm,  retired  reflec- 
tions, than  the  perusal  of  arguments  that  tend  to  disprove 
what  we  have  been  accustomed  to  advocate  and  support. 

(£T  The  object  of  this  letter  is  not  to  revile,  to  censure, 
nor  to  dispute  ;  but,  in  friendship  and  affection,  to  entreat 
you  to  reflect  and  consider  the  consequences  to  yourself  and 
others  of  that  system  of  sentiments  which  you  are  advocat- 
ing— anticipate  the  day  of  judgment,  and  realize  yourseJf 
called  upon  to  give  an  account  of  your  stewardship.  I  am 
not  disposed,  my  dear  sir,  to  impeach  your  sincerity  and 
honesty.  I  know  how  far  men  may  be  deluded  and  deceiv- 
ed.   I  am  disposed  to  believe  that  you  conscientiously  think 


SERIES    OF   LETTERS.  195 

the  sentiments  you  advocate  pre  true.  But  remember,  dear 
sir,  this  does  not  make  them  true,  nor  secure  you  from  the 
dreadful  consequences  in  which  they  may  issue.  With  all 
thiff  moral  emcerity  and  uprightness,  if  you  cease  to  warn 
the  wicked,  that  he  turn  from  his  wicked  way  (and  how  can 
this  be  more  effectually  done  than  by  leading  him  to  expect 
£nal,  everlasting  happiness)  his  blood  will  be  required  at 
your  hands,  The  apostle  Paul  most  conscientiously  perse- 
cuted the  christians  and  declared  to  the  council  before  whom 
he  was  arraigned,  that  he  had  lived  in  all  good  conscience 
before  God  till  that  day.  He  verily  thought  he  ought  to  do 
many  things  contrary  to  the  name  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  yet 
his  persuasion  did  not  acquit  him  from  guilt,  nor  would  it 
have  shielded  him  from  destruction  had  he  not  been  renew- 
ed to  repentance  and  faith  in  Christ,  while  as  yet  Christ  was 
in  the  way  with  him.  Christ  said  to  his  disciples,  "  The  time 
will  come  when  whosoever  killeth  you  will  think  he  doth 
God's  service  ;"  and  he  has  added,  "  many  will  say  unto  me, 
in  that  day,  Lord,  Lord,  have  we  not  prophesied  in  thy  name, 
and  in  thy  name  cast  out  devils,  and  in  thy  name  done  many 
wonderful  works?  then  will  I  profess  unto  them,  I  never 
knew  you,  depart  from  me  ye  that  work  iniquity."  What 
must  be  your  situation  in  the  day  of  retribution  if  the  system 
you  advocate  should  in  final  evidence  prove  false  ?  of  which 
fhave  not  the  least  shadow  of  doubt  upon  my  mind,  and 
therefore  have  all  the  forebodings  for  my  erring  and  de- 
ceived fellow  mortals  which  may  be  supposed  to  be  the  re- 
sult of  such  conviction. — 1  cannot  cease  to  warn  and  to  en- 
treat you  to  consider,  friendship  forbids,  my  withholding  the 
voice  of  warning  and  adjuration ;  and  both  duty  and  respect 
to  my  own  safety  require  me  to  endeavour  to  save  you  from 
the  issue,  of  which  I  have  such  awful  forebodings.  We 
must  both  stand  before  the  Son  of  man,  and  each  one  must 
give  an  account  of  himself  and  of  his  stewardship  to  God. — 
From  our  connextion  here,  there  will  probably  be  some  in- 
terest in  each  other  in  that  day  ;  and  I  cannot  bear  the 
thought  of  your  being  able  to  say  when  the  scheme  of  Uni- 
xersalism  shall  all  vanish  like  the  baseless  fabric  of  a  vision 
and  all  the  hopes  built  upon  it  will  be  like  the  spider's  web 
and  like  the  giving  up  of  the  ghost,  that  you  should  be  able 
to  say,  I  never  warned  you  of  this  issue,  nor  admonished  yoi. 
of  your  danger. 

I  know  not  with  what  sentiments  you  will  receive  this  ad- 
dress, nor  what  use  you  may  make  of  it ;  my  concern  is  with 


t9G  SERIES    OF  LETTER?. 

*he  sentiments  and  spirit  that  dictate  it.  I  think  they  are 
*uch  as  will  induce  me  continually  to  pray  that  you  may  not 
pierce  yourself  through  with  many  sorrows,  nor  be  left  to 
mourn  at  the  last. 

Your  friend  and  humble  servant, 

J.  BUCKMINSTER. 


LETTER  II. 

1  r05i  the  rev.  ii0sea  ballou  to  the  f,ev.  joseph  buckminster 

Portsmouth,  Jah't.  1,  1810. 

Rev.  Sir i — The  receipt  of  your  affectionate,  friendly  ad- 
dress, bearing-  date  December  28,  1809,  is  gratefully  ac- 
knowledged, and  although  I  have  not  words  fully  adequate 
to  express  the  satisfaction  I  feel  arising  from  the  circum- 
stance and  spirit  of  your  epistle,  I  cannot  be  willing  to  sup- 
press my  feelings  so  much  as  not  to  notice,  that  it  is  with  un- 
common pleasure  that  I  appreciate  your  favour,  which,  I  am 
uappy  to  acknowledge,  is  a  demonstration  of  that  friendship 
rirst  reciprocated  at  your  house,  and  secondly  recapitulated 
in  your  epistle.  This  friendship  founded,  as  you  justly  ob- 
serve, in  the  law  of  out  common  nature  and  in  the  spirit  and 
principles  of  the  christian  religion,  is  such  an  inexhaustible 
treasure  of  moral  riches  that  the  aggregate  sum  of  earthly 
wealth  is  poverty  in  the  comparison. 

This  friendship,  sir ^  being  founded  on  such  principles,  will 
undoubtedly  last  as  long"  as  such  principles  remain;  and  if 
you  are  my  real  friend  on  the  principle  of  the  law  of 'our 
common  nature,  so  long  as  you  possess  the  law  of  our  com- 
mon nature,  you  will  be  my  real  friend;  and  if  you  are  my 
real  friend,  on  the  principles  and  spirit  of  the  christian  reli- 
gion, so  long  as  you  possess  the  principles  and  spirit  of  the 
christian  religion,  you  will  remain  my  real  friend.  And  if  I 
be,  as  I  trust  in  God  I  am,  your  real  friend,  on  those  imper- 
ishable principles,  I  shall  continue  to  possess  this  friendship 
for  you  so  long  as  1  possess  those  principles.  If  these  obser- 
vations on  friendship  be  correct,  as  I  conceive  they  are,  you 
will  know  why  I  so  highly  prize  the  treasure,  especially 
when  I  find  it  in  a  man  capable  of  exercising  it  to  so  much 
advantage  as  your  learning,  ability  and  experience  enable 
you  to  do.  You  justly  observe  that  neither  piety  nor  friend- 
ship dictated  the  question,  "  Am  1  my  brothers  keeper?" 
How  different  must  have  been  the  spirit  which  dictated  that 


I 


SERIES   OF   LETTERS.  itf7 

question  from  the  spirit  of  him  who  snith,  I  will  declare  thy 
name  unto  my  brethren,  my  mother's  children  were  angry 
with  me,  they  made  me  the  keeper  of  the  vineyards,  but 
mine  own  vineyard  have  I  not  kept? 

Your  next  observation  is  highly  worthy,  not  only  of  gen- 
eral consideration,  but  of  particular  notice  ;  and  I  am  the 
more  pleased  with  it  on  account  of  its  falling  from  your  pen 
as  I  am  sure  you  must  understand  the  truths  which  are  ne- 
cessarily connected  with  the  one  expressed  in  the  observa- 
tion ;  your  words  are,  u  there  is  a  reciprocal  responsibility 
among  mankind  both  for  the  interest  of  time  and  eternity." 
As  it  cannot  reasonably  require  any  argument  to  discover 
the  propriety  of  supposing  that  the  eternal  interest  of  man- 
kind is  connected  with  eternal  causes  and  predicated  on 
eternal  principles,  so  when  it  is  acknowledged  that  a  recip- 
rocal responsibility  exists  among  mankind  for  their  eternal 
interest,  it  is  evident  that  this  reciprocal  responsibility  is 
eternal.  Should  any  conviction  of  mind  render  it  necessary 
that  we  give  up  the  idea  of  the  eternal  nature  of  this  recip- 
rocal responsibility,  that  conviction  would  drive  the  idea  of 
eternal  interest,  predicated  on  such  responsibility  from  our 
mind.  How  noble  are  your  sentiments  communicated  in  this 
observation  !  How  rich  must  you  and  I  feel  in  the  enjoy- 
ment of  such  reciprocal  principles  and  in  the  consequent  in- 
terest arising  from  them ;  not  only  for  time,  but  for  eter- 
nity ! 

You  very  justly  observe  again — u  Were  I  to  see  you  or 
any  others  exposing  themselves  to  danger  or  running  into 
situations  which  I  apprehended  would  be  destructive,  friend- 
ship would  require  me  to  warn  and  admonish,  and  to  endeav- 
our to  restrain.'"  These  expressions,  sir,  illustrate  the 
good  fruits  of  real  friendship,  and  as  our  Saviour  has  told  us 
that  the  tree  is  known  by  its  fruits,  so  we  are  to  distinguish 
between  real  and  pretended  friends  by  their  fruits.  Sup- 
pose, sir,  we  move  the  position  a  little,  and  say,  notwith- 
standing you  warn  me  and  endeavour  to  restrain  me  from 
danger,  1  persist  in  my  error,  and  my  calamity  comes  upon 
me;  in  this  situation  you  come  and  tell  me  that  you  are 
heartily  glad  that  I  am  tormented,  and  that  you  are  glad  to 
think  there  is  no  probability  of  my  misery's  being  any  less; 
that  you  feel  no  pity  for  me  now  ;  could  I  look  back  and  re- 
member your  warning,  and  believe  that  you  warned  me  out 
of  real  friendship?  We  have  just  seen  that  friendship  pre- 
dicated on  the  law  of  our  common  nature  and  on  the  princi- 
17* 


198  SERIES   OP   LETTERS. 

pics  and  spirit  of  the  christian  religion  must  necessarily  be 
as  durable  as  those  eternal  principles.  It  is  no  less  the 
characteristic  of  real  friendship  to  endeavour  to  meliorate 
than  to  preserve  from  sufferings. 

On  observing  your  admonitions,  and  believing  you  sincere 
in  them,  I  am  led  to  say.  that  had  I  such  a  friend  as  you  are 
who  possessed  the  means  for  making  me  eternally  happy,  I 
might  entertain  no  doubt  of  obtaining  the  inestimable  enjoy- 
ment ;  nor  do  1  view  you,  sir,  Less  a  friend  because  you  do 
not  possess  a  power  which  is  equal  to  the  putting  of  all  your 
friendly  desires  into  full  execution,  but  will  acknowledge 
you  my  worthy  friend,  and  accept:  the  warnings  which  you 
.t^ive  me  against  the  system  of  doctrine  which,  as  you  say,  I 
have  embraced  and  come  among  this  people  to  advocate,  as 
a  token  of  that  friendship  which  would,  if  connected  with 
suitable  power,  place  me  out  of  all  final  danger,  or  which 
would  cause  you  to  rejoice  exceedingly,  had  you  the  evi- 
dence to  believe  that  one  who  has  such  power  possesses 
even  stronger  desires  for  my  eternal  welfare  than  you  do. 

You  inform  me  thatyou  do  not  know  what  system  of  Uni- 
versalism  I  have  embraced;  Permit  me,  sir,  to  inform  you, 
though  j'ou  do  not  request  it,  that  i  have  embraced  the  sys- 
tem of  Universalism,  which  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  em- 
braced, in  believing  God,  who  said,  "  In  thee  shall  all  the 
families  of  the  earth  be  blessed  ;  and  in  thy  seed  shall  all  the 
nations  of  the  earth  be  blessed.'"  If  this  fnith  of  Abraham 
were  imputed  to  him  for  righteousness,  it  must  be  a  true 
faith,  and  if  true,  worthy  lobe  embraced  by  all  nations  and 
families  of  the  earth,  without  the  exception  of  an  individual. 
Permit  me  further  to  observe  that  1  disclaim  all  authors  as 
divine  guides,  except  the  divine  author  of  those  scriptures 
which  cannot  be  broken. 

You  rightly  apprehend  me  in  supposing  that  I  believe  and 
teach  that  ail  mankind  will  be  saved,  restored  and  associated 
with  Christ  Jesus  in  realms  of  glory  ;  but  I  do  not  believe 
as  you  intimate,  that  human  ingenuity,  or  plausible  and  sop- 
histic reasoning  are  necessary  to  the  supportof  this  doctrine 
among  men  ;  nor  will  I  attempt  to  say  how  sorry  I  am  that 
you  should  declare  the  doctrine  not  true  until  you  had  pro- 
duced a  "  thus  saith  the  Lord"  to  prove  it  false  ;  or  that  you 
should  intimate  that  I  am  employing  human  ingenuity  or 
plausible  and  sophistic  reasoning  to  support  the  universal 
fcenevolence  of  God  until  the  disagreeable  circumstance 
should  transpire,  in  which  I  might  be  justly  thus  charged. 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  ]9^ 

Although  in  order  to  please  myself,  I  might  explain  your 
meaning  as  directed  against  some  others  of  the  advocates  of 
the  heavenly  gospel  of  universal  salvation  :  I  could  rind  bu: 
little  satisfaction  in  thus  endeavoring  to  avoid  any  reproach 
which  is-  directed  against  the  true  disciples  of  my  divine 
Master. 

You  inform  me  that  as  universal  salvation  is  not  true,  "  it 
can  have  no  effect  in  quickening  into  life  or  of  sanctifying 
the  soul,  for  it  is  the  spirit  that  quickeneth,  and  the  truth 
which  sanctities."  If,  dear  sir,  you  do  not  believe  that  the 
spirit  of  salvation  quickeneth  into  life,  would  it  not  have 
baen  proper  to  inform  me  what  spirit  does?  And  I  should 
have  highty  esteemed  an  illustration  of  the  evidence  which 
you  have,  that  the  truth  that  tnaukind  will  remain  eternal!;; 
unsanclijied,  will  sanctify  the  soul  ;  I  fully  believe  that  as 
far  as  any  proposition  is  capable  of  being  proved  from  the 
written  word,  or  of  being  demonstrated  by  logical  reasoning 
from  acknowledged  facts,  the  doctrine  of  the  salvation  of  all 
men  is  capable  of  being  proved  and  substantially  maintained. 
Does  it  require  human  ingenuity  or  plausible  and  sophistic 
reasoning  to  make  it  appear  from  the  scriptures  that  Jesus 
Christ,  by  the  grace  of  God,  tasted  death  for  every  man  ;  that 
he  gave  himself  a  ransom  for  all  to  be  testified  in  due  time;  that 
he  is  the  propitiation  for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world  ;  that 
it  is  the  will  of  God  that  all  men  should  be  saved  and  come 
to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth  ;  that  he  worketh  all  things 
after  the  council  of  his  own  will? — Does  it  require  this  in- 
genuity, &,c.  to  substantiate  from  the  written  word  that  the 
promise  to  Abraham  will  be  fulfilled,  and  that  all  nations 
whom  God  hath  made  shall  come  and  worship  before  him 
and  glorify  his  name  ;  that  Jesus  will  in  the  fulness  of  time, 
reconcile  all  things  unto  himself,  whether  the-y  be  things  in 
heaven  or  things  on  earth,  or  things  under  ihe  earth  ;  that 
he  will  gather  together  in  one  all  things  in  Christ  both  which 
are  in  heaven  and  which  are  on  earth,  even  in  him  ?  If  it 
be  an  acknowledged  fact  that  God  will  bless  all  the  families 
of  the  earth  in  Christ,  that  all  nations  which  God  halh  made 
shall  come  and  worship  before  him  and  glorify  his  namo, 
that  Jesus  gave  himself  a  ransom  for  all  men  to  be  testified 
in  due  time,  that  he  did  by  the  grace  of  God  taste  death  for 
e-very  man,  that  he  will  have  ail  men  to  be  saved  and  come 
to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth,  that  he  hath  made  known  the 
mystery  of  his  will  according  to  his  good  pleasure  which  he 
u\Uh  purposed  in  himself;  that  in  the  dispensation  of  the  ful* 


200  SERIES   OF   LETTERS. 

ness  of  times,  he  would  gather  together  in  one,  all  things  in 
Christ,  both  which  are  in  heaven  and  which  are  on  earth, 
and  that  he  worketh  all  things  after  the  council  of  his  own 
will,  then  the  doctrine  of  the  salvation  of  all  men  is  as  fully 
acknowledged  as  language  can  possibly  express,  or  my  error 
lies  in  not  understanding  the  force  of  words  and  sentences. 

By  what  method,  sir,  would  it  be  proper  for  me  to  ex- 
press my  surprise  at  your  introducing  the  words  recorded  in 
the  13th  chapter  of  Ezekiel,  and  at  the  22d  verse,  as  a  tes- 
timony against  the  doctrine  of  universal  salvation?  M  Be- 
cause with  lies  ye  have  made  the  heart  of  the  righteous  sad, 
whom  I  have  not  made  sad,  and  strengthened  the  hands  of 
the  wicked  that  he  should  not  turn  from  his  wicked  way  by 
promising  him  life  ;" — Must  I  suppose,  sir,  that  you  believe, 
that  the  lies  mentioned  in  this  quotation  were  promises  of 
life  in  the  seed  of  Abraham,  in  whom  all  the  families  of  the 
earth  are  to  be  blessed  ?  I  cannot  believe  this  of  a  man  of 
your  understanding,  and  yet  cannot  conceive  why  you  adduce 
this  passage  as  proof  that  Christ  is  not  the  life  of  all  men. 
Is  it  not  evident  that  those  who  were  addressed  in  that  text 
were  such  as  promised  the  people  life  in  the  vain  traditions 
which  they  had  established,  by  which  they  made  void  the 
law  ?  And  what  does  the  Lord  say  that  he  would  finally  do 
in  this  case  ? — See  verse  23d,  "  Therefore  ye  shall  see  no 
more  vanity,  nor  divine  divinations;  for  I  will  deliver  my 
people  out  of  your  hands,  and  ye  shall  know  that  1  am  the 
Lord."  This  is  very  far  from  saying  that  they  should  be 
endlessly  miserable.  Christ  is  the  Lord  our  righteousness, 
*«md  his  heart  was  made  sad  by  the  traditions  of  the  house  of 
Israel  and  by  the  Rabbies  who  promised  the  people  life  in 
their  vain  customs  which  they  had  established  for  religion  : 
and  1  would  acknowledge  this  passage  justly  urged  against 
the  doctrine  which  1* should  vindicate,  should  I  set  up  any 
thing  but  Christ  and  him  crucified,  on  which  to  depend  for 
life  and  salvation  ;  but  you  leave  this  quotation  as  if  you  had 
done  what  you  hardly  meant  to  do,  by  observing  that  you 
do  not  intend  to  enter  into  a  dispute  on  this  subject,  neither 
to  enlarge  on  arguments  to  support  your  own  sentiments  nor 
to  disprove  mine. 

You  think  that  no  good  would  result  from  the  argument 
however  temperately  conducted  it  might  be,  assigning  the 
pride  of  peculiarity,  and  the  influence  of  party  views  as  suffi- 
cient barriers  to  prevent  success.  In  this  observation  may  I 
say  without  offendiDg,  sir,  you  are  inexplicit,  or  wanting  in 


SERIES    OF   LETTERS.  201 

propriety,  and  premature  in  application.  Temperate  men 
are  not  governed  in  their  religious  researches  by  the  pride 
of  peculiarity  nor  the  influence  of  party  views,  and  a  faithful 
trial  ought  to  have  been  made  in  order  to  convince  of  error 
before  the  charge  of  pride  of  peculiarity*  or  the  influence  of 
party  views,  could  with  propriety  have  been  made.  1  am 
disposed  to  believe  when  persons  are  candid  and  tempernte 
in  an  investigation,  the?  generally  obtain  light  and  edifica- 
tion. I  will  say  for  myself,  notwithstanding  1  highly  prize 
your  solemn  warnings,  and  believe  them  as  proceeding  from 
the  most  commendable  sentiments  of  friendship,  I  should 
have  been  much  pleased  if  you  had  accompanied  them  with 
the  best  and  most  forcible  arguments  of  which  you  are  mas- 
ter, against  the  doctrine  which  you  are  disposed  to  say  in  so 
many  words  " is  not  true*"  The  small  still  voice  to  which 
you  recommended  my  attention  has  never  told  me  that  Christ 
was  not  the  Saviour  of  all  men. 

May  we  not  suppose  that  this  voice  is  uniform  in  its  testi- 
mony? Do  tell  me,  sir,  if  that  voice  ever  told  you  that  it 
was  not  the  will  of Gcd  that  all  men  should  he  saved  !  U  it 
not  by  the  influence  of  the  spirit  of  this  voice  that  you  pray 
for  the  salvation  of  all  men?  And  jvc U Id  this  small  still 
■,-oice  tell  you  that  it  is  not  God's  will  to  save  all  men,  and 
then  induce  you  to  pray  for  all  men  ?  If  I  be  not  a  stran- 
ger to  this  heavenly  voice  which  teaches  me  to  wrap 
myself  in  my  mantle,  the  Lord  my  righteousness,  it  influen- 
ces me  to  pray  in  faith,  nothing  doubling,  for  the  salvation 
of  all  men. 

In  your  truly  affecting  entreaty  you  direct  toy  mind  to  the 
day  of  judgment  when  I  am  called  to  give  an  account  of  my 
stewardship,  and  ask  what  ray  situation  must  be,  if  the  system 
I  advocate  should  in  final  evidence,  prove  false  ?  1  have  se- 
riously thought  on  this  question  ;  and  this  is  my  conclusion  : 
My  judge  will  know  that  I  am,  in  this  instance,  honest  and 
sincere  ;  he  will  know  how  hardly  i  wrestled  against  his 
written  word  in  order  to  avoid  believing  that  he  would  save 
all  men,  and  he  will  know  that  my  deception  was  in  under- 
standing his  word  as  a  simple,  honest  man  would  understand 
a  plain  testimony  void  of  scholastic  dress.  In  this  case  1  am 
willing  to  throw  myself  on  the  mercy  of  the  judge.  On  the 
other  hand,  dear  sir,  I  have  made  a  calculation  too.  Sup- 
pose I  adhere  to  your  testimony,  that  the  doctrine  I  believe 
is  not  true,  and  abandon  it  as  a  heresy,  preach  it  down  to  the 
utmost  of  my  ability,  and  the  doctrine  at  last,  when  you  and 


202  SERIES   OF  LETTERS. 

I  stand  before  that  judge  who  knows  the  hearts  of  all  mec, 
should  in  final  evidence  of  the  law  and  prophets,  prove  true; 
of  which  1  have  not  the  least  shadow  of  doubt  in  my  mind, 
with  what  a  blush  must  I  give  up  my  account!  My  judge 
vvfco  has  suffered  very  thing  for  me,  asks  me,  why  did  you 
deny  me,  forsake  my  cau«e,  and  use  the  abilities  which  I  gave 
you  to  preach  that  dishonourable  doctrine  that  1  did  not  re- 
deem ail  men,  or  that  I  would  not  finally  reconcile  all  men  to 
myself,  and  cause  them  all  to  love  me  heartity  in  bliss  and 
glory  ?  I,  abashed  beyond  description,  must  answer,  a  man, 
who,  I  conceived  was  my  friend  and  who  preached  that 
God  my  Saviour,  never  intended  to  save  all  men,  told  me 
the  doctrine  1  preached  was  not  true  !  O,  hew  would  my 
soul  thrill  with  grief  when  a  look,  such  as  was  cast  on  Peter 
after  he  denied  his  Lord,  should  accompany  this  question, 
and  who  told  you  in  the  first  place  it  was  true  ? 

I  appeal  to  the  searcher  of  hearts  for  the  sincerity  of  my 
soul  when  !  say,  my  dear  sir,  I  feel  an  uncommon  desire  to 
erltivate  friendship  with  you,  and  were  it  possible  for  me  to 
gratify  you  in  any  thing  that  should  be  consistent  with  my 
d  }•  y  to  my  God,  1  think  I  should  not  shrink  from  the  service  ; 
but  should  the  multitude,  whose  hearts  have  been  made  joy- 
ful in  believing  in  the  salvation  of  all  men,  become  so  blind- 
ed as  to  renounce  the  sentiments,  I  must  remain  unshaken 
until  more  than  human  testimony  stands  against  the  doc- 
trine. 

I  am  very  sensible  of  the  propriety  of  the  observation, 
that  the  sincerity  of  a  belief  does  not  prove  the  thing  be- 
lieved to  be  true  ;  for  though  I  cannot  say  so  much  as  you 
do,  viz.  "  that  1  know  how  far  men  may  be  deluded  and  de- 
ceived," yet  I  am  sensible  that  men  may  be  deceived  and 
yet  be  honest  ;  and  it  is  on  this  ground,  that  I  have  charity 
for  those  who  believe  and  preach  different  from  me. 

Towards  the  conclusion  of  your  epistle,  you  intimate  that 
you  wish  not  to  have  me  say  at  last,  when  my  doctrine  is- 
sues in  my  mourning,  that  you  had  not  warned  me.  Be  as- 
sured, sir,  if  I  may  be  so  much  at  my  own  disposal  at  the 
last  day,  that  I  will  not  say,  you  did  not  warn  me  ;  but  if  my 
doctrine  be  false  at  test,  and  you  are  asked  why  you  did  not 
prove  from  the  written  word  to  my  understanding  that  I  was 
m  an  error,  will  you  say  in  answer,  that  it  would  have  been 
such  a  tax  upon  time,  that  you  could  not  afford  it,  that  you 
could  not  or  did  not  wish  to  ?  As  the  passages  which  you 
auote  on  your  last  page  are  designed  to  illust*ate  what  I  h* 


SERIES   OF    LETTERS.  203 

lieve  to  be  a  fact,  I  forbear,  at  this  time,  an  illustration  of 
them,  in  which,  the  impropriety  of  the  common  mode  of 
understanding  them  might  be  made  to  appear.  Should  you 
be  disposed  to  attempt  to  correct  my  ideas  in  this  epistle,  01 
mv  doctrine  in  general,  by  turning  to  the  great  touchstone, 
the  law  and  the  testimony,  be  as  ample,  sir,  as  your  inclina- 
tion and  opportunity  will  admit.  Every  argument  shall  be 
duly  attended  to  with  prayerful  solicitude  to  obtain  convic 
lion,  if  it  can  be  found  ;  and  whatever  light  I  gain  I  will 
gratefully  acknowledge,  and  wherein  I  do  not  agree  with 
you,  I  will  give  you  my  reasons. 

Your  most  obliged  friend  and  humble  servant, 

HOSEA  BALLOL 

Rev.  J.  BuCKMINSTER. 

P.  S.     If  I  have  been  so  unfortunate  in  the  foregoing  epis 
tie  as  to  make  choice  of  any  words  which  indicate  too  mucli 
freedom,  please  to  impute  it  to  a  frankness  which  perhaps  ! 
sometimes  indulge  to  a  fault,  and  not  to  anv  want  of  due  re- 
spect. J1.J3. 


LETTER  III. 
from  the  rev.  joseph  buckmisster  to  the  rev.  i10sea  ballou- 

Portsmouth,  Jan.  10,  1810. 

Dear  Sir, — It  was  not  my  intention,  in  the  letter  which  I 
sometime  since  addressed  to  you,  to  enter  into  a  discussion 
of  the  subject  of  Universalism,  much  less,  for  reasons  that 
were  suggested,  provoke  a  dispute  upon  it.  I  therefore  en- 
deavoured so  to  express  myself  that  no  reply  should  be  ne- 
cessary. 

My  object  was  to  discharge  what  I  thought  a  duty  of  friend- 
ship and  affection,  rendered  more  necessary  by  my  personal 
declarations  to  you  at  my  house,  by  stating  to  you  with 
frankness  and  decision  what  I  was  persuaded  would  be  the 
final  result  of  that  sentiment  which  you  have  embraced,  and 
are  advocating  among  us  ;  and  to  fulfil  a  duty  which  I  owe 
to  myself,  and  to  Him  who  has  set  me  here  to  be  a  watch- 
man, that  I  might  use  every  proper  precaution  to  appear 
before  my  Judge  at  last  with  unstained  garments,  preclude 
an  occasion  for  a  crimination  and  reproach,  and  give  up  my 
account  with  joy  and  not  with  grief. 

I  might  have  a  secret  hope  that  the  apprehensions  so  se- 
riously and  candidly  suggested  might  excite  you  to  review 


2iM  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

your  sentiments,  and  renewedly  compare  them  with  the  on\) 
standard,  and  that  this  serious,  calm  and  retired  exercise 
might  he  accompanied  with  an  influence  from  above,  that 
might  alter  your  views  and  conclusions  upon  the  subject  ;  but 
my  principal  design  was  to  discharge  what  I  thought  my  du- 
ty as  above  stated.  You  have  thought  it  your  duty  to  re- 
mark upon  the  address,  and  intimate  an  expectation  that  I 
should  rejoin  ;  your  professions  and  candor  have  induced 
me  for  a  time,  to  hesitate  whether  I  ought  not,  in  this  in- 
stance, to  depart  from  my  general  resolutions,  and  this  hesi- 
tation has  had  influence  in  my  delay  to  notice  your  letter 
"But  the  result  of  my  hesitations,  reflections  and  prayer,  is  a 
more  fall  persuasion:,  »*  that  if  the  writings  of  Dr.  Edwards. 
Dr.  Strong  and  others  who  have  discussed  the  subject,  and 
which  doubtless  you  have  seen,  have  produced  no  hesitation 
or  conviction  in  your  mind,  it  would  be  vain  and  idle  to  ex- 
pect it  from  any  efforts  of  mine  ;  and  that  it  would  be  amis- 
use  of  time  which  might  be  employed  in  more  hopeful  pros- 
pects of  usefulness.  This  is  a  reason  which  I  at  present  feel 
satisfied  to  give  to  God  and  my  conscience  for  declining  to 
enter  upon  a  discussion  of  this  subject,  and  \  trust  it  will  be 
accepted  at  the  tribunal  of  God.  To  that  tribunal  !  humbly 
and  cheerfully  refer  the  decision  of  the  question  that  would 
be  matter  of  dispute  between  us,  from  Which  decision  there 
will  be  no  appeal,  and  to  which  there  will  be  no  liberty  to 
reply.  I  reciprocate  the  tender  of  every  office  of  friendship 
consistent  with  what  I  think  my  duty  to  God  and  my  con- 
science, and  shall  not  cease  to  pray  that,  those  who  have  er- 
red from  the  truth  may  be  recovered  from  their  errors,  and 
being  sanctified  by  the  truth,  may  be  saved  in  the  day  of  the 
Lord  Jesus.  Your  friend  and  well  wisher. 

J.  BUCKMINSTE.R. 


LETTER  IV. 

FROM  THE  REV.  HOSEA  BALLOU  TO  THE  REV.  JOSEPH  BUCKMINSTER. 

Portsmouth,  Jan.  II,  1310. 
Rev.  Sir, — Your  favour  of  yesterday  is  acknowledged  with 
that  respectful  submission  which  ycur  age  and  experience, 
together  with  the  spirit  and  import  of  your  note  justly  impose, 
and  with  gratitude  also,  for  an  obligation  which  1  wished  to 
be  under  in  being  satisfied  of  your  having  received  my  epis- 
tle of  the  1st -inst     This  I   learn  hy  the  friendly  rebuke  in 


SERIES   <s)F    LETTERS.  20^> 

•  our  first  section  in  which  you  speak  of  my  reply  as  unneces- 
sary,and  also  by  your  condescending  to  refer  to  it  again  in  your 
fourth  section. .  Had  I,  sir,  viewed  your  address  altogether 
in  the  light  which  you  inform  me  you  did,  or  had  you  inform- 
ed me  that  a  reply  would  not  be  expected,  I  should  by  no 
means,  have  troubled  you  contrary  to  your  wishes.  How- 
over,  as  you  are  an  experienced  judge  of  all  such  matters,  so 
you  will  condescend  to  pardon  me  if  in  your  judgment  my 
epistle  is  destitute  of  important  subjects.  You  are  so  kind  as 
*o  repeat  the  design  of  your  address  again,  certifying  me  that 
your  object  was  to  discharge  the  office  of  friendship,  by  stat- 
ing to  me  with  frankness  and  decision  what  you  are  persuad- 
ed will  be  the  final  result  of  that  sentiment  which  I  have  era- 
braced  and  am  advocating.  No  man,  sir,  will  ever  be  more 
ready  to  acknowledge  a  friendly  office  with  sentiments  of 
gratitude  than  your  humble  servant ;  but  I  am  sure  it  cannot 
be  expected  by  you,  that  I  should  receive  the  testimony  of  a 
man,  however  friendly  to  me,  as  a  decision  against  that  gos- 
pel which  I  did  not  receive  of  man,  nor  by  man,  but  by  the 
revelation  of  Jesus  Christ. 

Your  precautions  in  warning  me  as  they  regard  your  final 
justification  before  God,  I  hope  will  be  superceded  by  the  ac- 
ceptable atonement  of  the  Lamb  of  God  which  taketh  away 
the  sins  of  the  world;  though  that  shall  not  render  your 
faithfulness  void  of  approbation  in  a  subordinate  sense.  The 
secret  hope  which  you  entertained  of  exciting  me,  by  your 
serious  apprehensions  to  review  my  sentiments  and  renewed- 
ly  to  compare  them  with  the  only  standard,  would  perhaps 
appear  not  altogether  so  necessary,  did  you  know  that  my 
daily  business  is  to  study  the  law  and  the  testimony,  which 
increase  their  light  as  they  are  more  examined,  and  furnish 
every  hour  I  study  them,  new  proofs  of  the  unbounded  good- 
ness of  God  to  the  sinful  race  of  Adam.  O  mv  dp^r  friend  ! 
Could  you  but  know  the  inexpressible  consolation  and  peace 
which  1  enjoy  in  believing  that  he,  who  gave  himself  a  ran- 
som for  all  men,  will  finally  see  of  the  travaii  of  his  soul,  and 
be  satisfied,  you  could  not  feel  concerned  about  the  final  is- 
sue of  the  doctrine  which  I  believe  and  advocate  ! 

I  feel  that  my  blessed  Lord  and  kind  Redeemer  deserves 
every  exertion  of  mine  to  persuade  men  to  the  knowl- 
edge of  that  truth  which  would  make  them  fre>e  ;  nor 
can  I  easily  forbear  to  express  my  desire  that  your  greater 
experience  and  better  abilities  might  be  employed  in  c!;ewing 
to  poor  benighted  sinners  the  divine  amplitude  of  gospel 
IS 


206  SERIES  OF    LETTERS. 

grace  for  the  salvation  of  all  mankind.  I  believe,  dear  sir,  it 
it  should  please  God  to  discover  this  soul  rejoicing  truth  to 
you,  that  the  angels  would  rejoice  in  heaven,  and  saints  on 
earth  would  be  made  exceeding  glad :  yes,  your  church  and 
parish  would  follow  }'ou  with  rapturous  joy  to  the  fountain 
which  is  open  for  Judah  and  Jerusalem  to  wash  in  from  sin 
and  uncleanness,  and  to  which  the  fulness  of  the  Gentiles 
shall  be  gathered. 

Lam  not  at  all  disposed  to  complain  of  your  decision  not  to 
enter  into  an  investigation  of  the  doctrine  against  the  truth  of 
which  you  have  opposed  your  testimony  ;  though  I  should 
hardly  have  believed  that  in  your  judgment,  such  a  testimony 
could  have  been  thought  proper  unless  preceded  or  succeed- 
ed by  some  colour  of  evidence.  No  man,  my  dear  sir,  is  less 
calculated  to  enjoy  a  dry,  unfruitful  controversy  on  religious 
sentiments  than  1  am — though  I  wish  to  hold  myself  in  per- 
petual readiness  to  give  an  answer  to  every  man  who  may 
ask  me  a  reason  for  the  hope  that  is  within  me  with  meekness 
and  fear. 

The  arguments  of  Dr.  Edwards  and  Dr.  Strong  being  dis- 
posed to  represent  the  divine  economy  of  grace  less  extensive 
than  the  plain  and  positive  promises  of  God,  the  testimony  of 
the  prophets,  the  word  of  life  through  Christ  and  the  witness- 
ing apostles,  have  declared  it  to  be,  stand  forever  refuted  by 
that  cloud  of  witnesses,  as  they  are  also  by  the  spirit  of  Christ 
in  every  humble  believing  heart.  It  is  far  more  easy  for  the 
rational  lover  of  Christ  to  believe  those  learned  doctors,  de- 
ceived by  the  vain  traditions  of  the  schools,  than  to  believe 
that  the  grace  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus  is  less  extensive  than  bis 
word  and  spirit  declare  it  to  be. 

If  there  never  were  a  true  christian  whose  desires  did  not 
extend  to  the  whole  hu^ian  race,  that  all  might  be  brought  to 
a  saving  repentance  and  to  holy  and  happy  life  in  Christ,  then 
Jesus  has  never  left  himself  without  a  witness  in  his  disciples, 
that  all  the  creeds  of  men  which  limit  the  divine  favour  are 
false.  With  whatsoever  panics  worms  of  the  dust  may  have 
struck  their  fellow  worms  by  challenging  them  to  a  decision 
of  their  weak,  insignificant  notions  at  a  tribunal  of  an  omnipo- 
tent judge,  such  solemn  appeals  can  have  but  little  effect  on 
the  humble  mind  who. leans  not  to  his  own  wisdom,  and  who 
views  every  thing  already  decided  in  the  eternal  system  of  that 
God  whose  tender  mercies  are  over  all  the  works  of  his  hands. 

The  mode  in  which  you  express  the  circumstance  of  final 
jadgment  is  rather  indicative  of  what  I  hope  you  do  not  mean; 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS*  207 

as  it  intimates  that  too  much  freedom  has  been  assumed  by 
me  in  presuming  to  reply  to  your  address.  There  is  much 
to  excite  my  gratitude  in  the  assurance  you  give  me  of  recip- 
rocating offices  of  friendship,  consistent  with  duty  to  God  ; — 
and  while  you,  sir,  give  me  to  understand  that  I  have  an  in- 
terest in  your  prayers,  permit  me  to  beg  your  supplications, 
that  I  may  be  faithful  unto  death  ;  and  to  assure  you  of  my' 
humble  desire  that  you  may  continue  to  be  useful  to  your  fel- 
low pilgrims  while  you  live,  and  find  acceptance  with  God 
through  Christ  at  last.  Your  most  obliged  friend  and  hum- 
ble servant  in  Christ,  HOSEA  BALLOU. 


k  NOTE  FROM  THE  RLV.  DR.  SUCKMINSTER  TO  THE  REV.  MR.  BALLOU, 

Friday,  P.  M. 
It  is  a  duty  which  Mr.  Buckminster  owes  to  himself  to  de- 
clare that  the  thought  of  intimating  that  it  was  any  assump- 
tion or  presumption  in  Mr.  Ballou  to  reply  to  his  address,nev- 
er  once  entered  his  mind  ;  and  he  is  sorry  if  any  thing  in  Mr. 
Buckminster's  communications  could  give  ground  to  suspect 
such  foolish  vanity ;  but  it  confirms  the  correctness  of  the 
opinion,  that  disputes  however  temperately  conducted  are  rarely 
productive  of  any  good.  All  that  he  meant  was  that  the  de- 
cision at  the  tribunal  of  God  would  be  fioal. 


A  NOTE  FROM  THE  REV.  MR.  BALLOU  TO  THE  REV.  DR.  BUCKMINSTER, 
IN  REPLY. 

Saturday.  P.  M. 
Mr.  Ballou  is  happy  to  acknowledge  the  honour  done  him 
by  the  Doctor's  note  of  Friday,  P.  M.  by  which  he  realizes 
the  hope  expressed  in  his  epistle  of  the  11th  inst.  that  what 
appeared  to  be  intimated  by  the  Doctor's  letter  of  the  10th 
inst.  in  relation  to  final  judgment  was  not  meant.  In  the 
mean  time  Mr.  Ballou  thinks  it  a  duty  which  he  owes  to  him- 
self to  point  out  to  the  Doctor  the  items  in  his  letter  which 
were  misunderstood.  The  Doctor's  expression,  "  I  there- 
fore endeavoured  so  to  express  myself  that  no  reply  should 
be  necessary,"  was  understood  to  intimate  that  the  reply  Was 
unnecessary  ;  and  the  Doctor's  expression,  "  there  will  be  no 
liberty  to  reply,"  was  understood  to  intimate  that  liberty  had 
been  assumed  unnecessarily.  In  confirming  the  opinion,  that 
w  disputes  however  temperately  conducted,  are  rarely  productive 
of  any  good."  Mr.  Ballou  thinks  hi3  mistake  has  produced 
but  little  consequence,  as  that  opinion  was  so  confirmed  be- 
fore, that  even  a  reasoa  for  au  assertion  could  not  with  pro- 
priety be  given. 


208  SERIES   OF    LETTERS. 

LETTER  I. 

"from  the  rev.  joseph  walton  to  the  rev.  hosea  ballov. 

Portsmouth,  Nov.  19,  1810. 
Dear  Friend, — I  lake  this  method  to  write  to  you,  with  a 
desire  you  would  receive  it  as  a  friendly  admonition.  You 
recollect,  no  doubt,  that  I  have  heard  you  make  two  speeches 
at  funerals,  as  they  are  commonly  called,  one  at  the  grave 
and  the  other  at  the  house  of  sorrow  and  mourning,  upon  a 
very  solemn  and  singular  occasion.  At  the  grave  you  were 
short,  and  said,  if  I  mistake  not,  viewing  the  grave,  "  this  is 
the  house  appointed  for  all  living,"  two  or  three  times,  and 
then  said,  "  what  reflection  shall  we  make  from  it  ?  is  it  done 
by  an  enemy  ?  has  the  Almighty  suffered  the  government  to 
betaken  out  of  his  hands?" — and  spake  as  if  death  was  origi- 
nally designed  by  the  Almighty  for  the  good  of  mankind,  and 
made  it  a  very  desirable  thing.  My  dear  sir,  doth  not  the 
bible, which  is  the  word  of  God, or  the  scriptures  of  truth  say> 
w  Wherefore  as  by  one  man  sin  entered  into  the  world,  and 
ri€ath  by  sin,  and  so  death  passed  upon  all  men,  for  that  all 
have  sinned,"  Rom.  v.  12,  and  Rom.  vi.  23,  i;  For  the  wages 
of  sin  is  death."  God  who  is  a  gracious  and  holy  sovereign 
'-'  made  man  upright,  but  he  sought  out  many  inventions." 
By  listening  unto  that  apostate  spirit,  Satan,  he  transgressed 
and  disobeyed  his  maker  and  sovereign,  by  eating  the  forbid- 
den fruit.  "God  made  man  in  his  own  imag»j,  yi  the  image 
of  Go:1  created  he  him,  male  and  female  created  he  them. 
And  the  Lord  God  took  the  man  and  put  him  into  the  garden 
of  Eden,  to  dress  it  and  to  keep  it;  and  the  Lord  God  com- 
manded the  man,  saying,  of  every  tree  of  the  garden  thou 
mayest  freely  eat,  hut  of  the  tree  of  knowledge  of  good  and 
evil,  thou  shalt  not  eat  of  it,  for  in  the  day  thou  eatest  there- 
of, thou  shalt  surely  die."  Gen.  ii.  15, 17.  Sin  is  that  enemy 
that  introduced  or  was  the  cause  of  death,  as  we  may  further 
see  by  considering  that  portion  of  scripture,  1  John.  iii.  8, 
•'  He  that  committeth  sin  is  of  the  devil,  for  the  devil  sinneth 
from  the  beginning."  For  this  purpose  the  Son  of  God  was 
manifested,  that  he  might  destroy  the  works  of  the  devil. 
Sin  is  the  work  of  the  devii ;  "  the  soul  that  sins  shall  die." 
If  you  will  read  the  whole  chapter  and  seriously  considerit, 
and  pray  to  God  through  Jesus  Christ  to  open  your  under- 
standing, that  you  may  understand  the  scriptures,  you  would 
not  misappply  and  pervert  them  as  I  fear  you  do.     In  you? 


SEMES   OF    LETTERS.  209 

speaking  at  the  house  of  mourning-,  you  began  and  spake  very 
eloquently  at  first  upon  death  ;  then  you  brought  forward  the 
tame  idea.?,  with  respect  to  death,  as  you  did  before  at  the 
grave.  I  do  not  remember  that  you,  at  either  place,  spake 
one  word  of  the  necessity  or  nature  of  repentance.  Christ 
began  his  personal  and  public  ministry  by  preaching  repen- 
tance, saying,  "  Repent,  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at 
hand" — again,  "  but  except  ye  repent,  ye  shall  all  likewise 
perish,"  Luke  xiii.  5.  And  after  his  resurrection  from  the 
dead  he  appeared  to  his  disciples  and  confirmed  them  in  the 
certainty  of  it,  and  chose  them  witnesses  of  the  truth  of  it, 
and  said  "thus  it  is  written,  and  thus  it  behoveth  Christ  to  suf- 
fer and  to  rise  from  the  dead  the  third  day.  And  that  repen- 
tance and  remission  of  sins  should  be  preached  in  my  name, 
among  all  nations,  begining  at  Jerusalem.  And  ye  are  wit- 
nesses of  these  things,"  Luke  xxiv.  46,  47,  48.  The  apos- 
tles, after  Christ's  ascension,  practised  as  he  commanded 
them,  as  we  may  see  by  reading  the  Acts  of  the  apostles; 
Peter  in  particular,  in  the  2d  and  3d  chapters;  and  we  do  not 
find  that  they  ever  gave  any  encouragement  that  their  hear- 
ers could  or  should  be  forgiven  their  sins  without  faith  and 
repentance.  Peter  says,  u  Repent,  and  be  converted,  that 
your  sins  may  be  blotted  out;"  which  presupposes  that  if  they 
did  not  repent  and  be  turned  to  God  by  converting  grace 
their  sins  would  not  be  forgiven.  Thus  the  apostle  Paul 
preached,  see  Acts  xxvi.  18,  19,  20,  which  I  entreat  you  to 
read  and  seriously  to  consider.  See  likewise  20th  chap,  of 
the  Acts  of  the  apostles,  how  he  appealed  to  the  elders  of  the 
church  ;  in  the  17th  verse  it  is  written,  M  And  from  Miletus 
he  sent  to  Ephesus,  and  called  the  elders  of  the  church  ;  ami 
when  they  were  come  to  him  he  said  unto  them,  ye  know 
from  the  first  day  I  came  into  Asia  after  what  manner  1  have 
been  with  you  at  all  seasons,  serving  the  Lord  with  all  humil- 
ity of  mind,  and  with  many  tears  and  temptations  which  be- 
fel  me,  by  the  lying  in  wait  of  the  Jews  ;  and  how  I  kept  back 
nothing  that  was  profitable  unco  you,  but  have  shewed  you 
and  have  taught  you  publicly  and  from  house  to  house,  testi- 
fying both  to  the  Jews  and  also  to  the  Greeks,  repentance 
towards  God,  and  faith  towards  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  The 
apostles  spake  of  the  nature  of  repentance  that  they  should 
bring  forth  fruits  meet  for  repentance,  and  that  Godly  sor- 
row worked  repentance  to  salvation,  not  to  be  repented  of; 
but  the  sorrow  of  the  world  worketh  death.  For  a  minister 
of  the  New  Testament  to  advance  such  doctrine  as  will  givr 
18* 


210  SERIES    OF   LETTERS. 

hopes  to  their  hearers  that  all  will  be  happy  in  a  future  state. 
whether  they  have  repented  or  no,  is  not  preaching  as Chris' 
and  his  apostles  preached.  If  we  know  not  God,  and  obey 
not  the  gospel  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  what  will  be  the 
consequence  ?  See  2  Thes.  i.  8,  9.  Ministers  are  directed 
by  the  inspired  apostle  Paul ;  see  in  his  epistles  to  Timothy 
and  Titus.  See  2  Tim.  4th  chap,  from  1st  to  the  end,  the 
5th  verse,  which  I  would  entreat  and  beseech  you  to  read 
and  seriously  consider.  He,  in  some  of  those  verses  refered 
to,  says  to  Timothy,  "Reprove,  rebuke,  exhort,  with  all  long 
suffering  and  doctrine  ;  for  the  time  will  come  when  men  or 
they,  will  not  endure  sound  doctrine,  but  after  their  own 
lusts  shall  they  henp  to  themselves  teachers  having  itching 
ears.  And  they  shall  turn  away  their  ears  from  the  truth, 
and  shall  be  turned  unto  fables.  But  watch  thou-in  all  things, 
endure  afflictions,  do  the  work  of  an  evangelist,  make  proof 
of  thy  ministry."  Paul  was  just  about  to  leave  the  -world  ; 
the  time  of  his  departure  was  at  hand  ;  the  above  were  his 
dying  words  to  his  beloved  son  Timothy  (in  the  faith.)  The 
Messed  and  beloved  apostle  had  through  grace  kept  the  faith, 
that  is,  the  true  faith  of  the  gospel ;  he  had  finished  his 
course,  he  had  fought  a  good  fight,  and  henceforth  he  say&, 
there  is  laid  up  for  me  a  crown  of  righteousness  which  God 
the  righteous  judge  shall  give  me  at  that  day;  and  not  only 
to  me,  but  unto  all  them  also,  that  love  his  appearing.  You, 
ray  friend,  once  professed  the  true  faith  of  the  gospel — have 
you  kept  it?  I  think  not.  I  fear  you  have  apostatised  from 
it.  You  are  now  preaching  a  doctrine  which  pleases  the 
world,  but  it  makes  against  you,  according  to  scripture  ;  the 
apostle  John  says,  in  1st  epistle,  4th  chap.  5th  and  6th  verses. 
"  They  are  of  the  world  ;  therefore  the  world  heareth  them. 
We  are  of  God  ;  he  that  knoweth  God  heareth  us  ;  he  that 
is  not  of  God  heareth  not  us  ;  hereby  know  we  the  spirit  of 
truth,  and  the  spirit  of  error."  I  beseech  you  again,  my 
friend,  examine  and  seriously  consider  the  first  five  verses 
©f  that  chapter,  and  pray  God  through  Jesus  Christ  that  he 
would  open  it  to  your  understanding.  Solomon  says,  u  My 
son,  lean  not  to  your  own  understanding."  I  could  not  but 
observe  with  what  an  emphasis  you  at  the  grave,  mentioned 
those  selected  texts  of  scripture  which  you  supposed  would 
confirm  your  hearers  in  the  doctrine  of  Universal  Salvation, 
Would  Christ  or  the  apostles  preach  Universal  Salvation  in 
one  place  of  scripture,  and  in  another  contradict  it?  I  be- 
lieve thev  would  not.     I  am  an  old  man*  and  have  stcdied  tb* 


SERIES   OF    LETTERS.  2TT 

scriptures  twenty  or  thirty  years  ;  yen,  I  may  say  more  or 
Jess  from  my  youth  up  ;  I  find  it  the  best  way  of  study,  to  com- 
pare scripture  with  scripture  ;  to  consider  the  preceding  and 
following  context  ;  to  be  self-diflident  ;  and  to  be  much  in 
prayer,  that  it  would  please  God,  by  hi*  holy  spirit,  to  lead 
and  guide  us  into  all  necessary  truth;  and  I  do  not  think  it  amiss 
to  use  sound  authors,  for  as  we  are  in  some  measure  depen- 
dant on  one  another  for  temporal,  so  I  think  we  may,  under 
God,  be  for  spiritual  assistance  ;  though  by  no  means  to  put 
our  trust  in  an  arm  of  'flesh. 

We  may  observe  how  earnest  David  in  prnyer  to  God,  was 
in  the  2oth  Psalm,  lie  was  a  prophet  as  well  the  roya! 
Psalmist,  yet  he  comes  in  a  very  humble  manner  to  God  in 
prayer  that  he  would  :^hew  him  his  ways,  and  teach  him  his 
paths  ;  and  in  that  Psalm.  Oth  verse,  says, C1  good  and  upright 
is  the  Lord:  therefore  will  he  teach  sinners  in  the  vvav.  The 
meek  wiii  he  guide  in  judgment ;  and  the  meek  he  will  teach 
his  way/'  But  if  men  will  undertake  to  explain  scripture  in 
their  own  strength  and  wisdom,  what  must  we  expect  but  to 
have  them  mangled  and  made  havoc  of,  or  explained  in  a 
mere  mystical  or  literal  sense  ?  "  The  natural  man  receiv- 
eth  not  the  things  of  the  spirit  of  God  :  for  they  are  foolish- 
ness unto  him,  neither  can  he  know  them,  because  they  are 
spiritually  discerned."     See  1  Cor.  ii.  14. 

As  you  did  not  say  any  thing  about  tlie  resurrection  of  the 
dead  in  either  of  your  speeches,  1  began  to  query  in  my  mind 
whether  you  believed  it  or  no.  I  think,  yea,  I  know,  it  was 
preached  by  Christ,  and  explained  so  as  to  confute  the  Sad- 
ducees.  Our  Lord  says,  "Marvel  not  at  this,  for  the  hour 
is  coming  in  the  which  alJ  that  are  in  their  graves  shall  hear 
his  voice,  and  shall  come  forth  ;  they  that  have  done  good 
unto  the  resurrection  of  life,  and  they  that  have  done  evil  unto 
the  resurrection  of  damnation. "  St.  Paul  in  his  defence  be- 
fore the  Roman  governor  when  accused  by  an  orator,  whom 
the  Jews  employed,  as  he  was  allowed  tospeakfor  himself, 
said,  u  they  cannot  prove  the  thing,  whereof  they  now  ac- 
cuse me  ;  but  this  I  confess  after  the  way  which  they  call 
heresy  ;  so  worship  I  the  God  of  my  fathers,  believing  all 
things  which  are  written  in  the  law  and  the  prophets,  "and 
have  hope  toward*  God,  winch  they  themselves  also  allow  ; 
that  there  shall  be  a  resurreclion  of  the  dead,  both  of  the 
just  and  unjust;  and  herein  do  I  exercise  myself  to  have  al- 
ways a  conscience  void  of  offeuce  toward  God,  and  toward 
man."     We  mav  observe  what  an  influence  the  belief  of  3t« 


212  SERIES    OF   LETTERS. 

future  state  of  rewards  and  punishments  had  on  the  blessed 
apostle  to  excite  him  to  live  a  godly  and  self-denying  life. 
Iu  2  Cor.  v.  10,  11,  speaking  of  a  day  of  judgment,  "  when 
every  one  must  give  an  account  for  himself  as  the  deeds  have 
been  done  in  the  body,  that  every  one  may  receive  the 
things  done  in  his  body  according  to  that  he  bath  done 
whether  it  be  good  or  bad  ;"  and  says,  "  knowing  the  terror 
of  the  Lord,  we  persuade  men."  My  friend,  is  there  the 
least  room  for  us  to  believe  from  this  scripture  and  many 
others,  that  the  wicked  who  have  died  impenitent  and  in  a 
disbelief  of  the  gospel  or  without  the  true  knowledge  of  God 
and  Jesus  Christ,  whom  God  hath  sent,  have  eternal  life,  in 
ihe  fruition  and  enjoyment  of  God  ?  Heaven  consists  in  be- 
ing made  like  God,  and  enjoying  him:  hence  it  is,  that  the 
pious  thirst  for  God,  the  living  God,  saying,  when  shall  I 
come  and  appear  before  him  ?  Again,  "  Whom  have  I  in 
heaven  but  thee  ?  and  there  is  none  upon  earth  I  desire  fee- 
sides  thee.  My  flesh  and  heart  fail  me,  but  God  is  the 
strength  of  my  heart  and  portion  forever."  These  pious 
breathings  are  the  exercises  of  the  children  of  God.  O 
may  they  be  ours.  JOSEPH  WALTON. 

PORSTMOUTH,  NOV.  19,  1810. 

P.  S.  The  within,  enclosed,  my  friend,  I  can  assure  you 
r*vas  not  written  to  you  in  this  manner,  as  God  is  my  judge, 
from  an  envious  and  bitter  spirit,  fori  love  and  esteem  your 
person,  as  a  friend,  who  has,  from  my  first  acquaintance  with 
you,  treated  me  with  great  respect.  I  see,  on  the  Lord's 
days,  great  numbers  of  precious  souls  going  and  returning 
from  your  meeting ;  and,  as  far  as  I  know  my  own  heart,  I  do 
not  envy  you  for  that ;  but  have  often  prayed  that  the  gifts 
end  natural  abilities  you  have  might  be  sanctified  and  turned 
into  right  improvements,  which  is  the  glory  of  God  and  the 
saving  benefit  of  your  hearers.  May  it  please  God  to  make 
you  an  able  and  faithful  minister  of  the  New  Testament,  not 
of  the  letter,  but  of  the  spirit,  for  the  letter  killetb,  but  the 
spirit  giveth  life.  From  your  friend  and  humble  servant, 
JOSEPH  WALTON,  Pastor, 
Of  the  Independent  Congregational  Church  in  Portsmouth. 

TO    MR.  HOSEA  BALLOU,    PASTOR   OF    THE    UNIVERSAL  CHURCH   AND 
SOCIETY    IN    PORTSMOUTH. 

Sir, — You  may  observe  by  the  date,  the  letter  has  been 
■written  some  time  ;  but  by  several  avocations  I  have  not  had 
time  to  correct  and  copy  it  until  ihe  present  daLc,  Decern 

J..W. 


SERIES    OP    LETTERS.  213 

LETTER  II. 

FROli  THE  REV.  HOSEA  BALLOU  TO  THE  REV.  JOSEPH  WALTON. 

Portsmouth,  Dec.  II,  1810. 

Rev.  Sir, — It  is  with  pleasure  that  I  hasten  to  acknowledge 
the  receipt  of  your  "  friendly  admonition,"''  bearing  date  Do* 
cember  7th,  which  came  to  my  hand  late  last  evening,  which 
I  assure  you  is  accepted  as  a  token  of  friendship,  and  a  mark 
of  particular  attention  ;  and  merits,  as  1  conceive,  a  grateful 
acknowledgement  as  well  as  an  early  answer. 

Your  admonition  begins  by  taking  notice  of  what  you  con- 
ceive an  egregious  error  which  you  have  heard  me  suggest 
at  two  several  funerals.  You  say  that  1  "  spake  as  if  death 
was  originally  designed,  by  the  Almighty,  {"or  the  good  of' 
mankind. -'  This  statement  you  consider  of  such  a  dangerous 
nature  that  it  renders  an  admonition  necessary.  But,  deaF 
sir,  there  are  two  important  ideas  contained  in  the  above  short 
sentence,  and  you  have  not  distinguished  between  them,  not 
informed  me  whether  it  be  both,  or  only  one  which  is  thus 
reprehensible. 

That  God  originally  designed  death,  is  one  idea  ;  that  he  de- 
signed it  for  the  good  otmankind  is  another  idea.  In  order  to 
do  you  justice  and  to  attach  no  other  meaning  to  your  com- 
munication than  such  as  I  conceive  to  be  consistent  with  your 
real  sentiments,  I  must  suppose  that  you  would  not  wish  to 
fault  the  first  of  those  ideas,  as  it  is  an  item  in  your  creed, 
that  u  God  foreordained  whatsoever  comes  to  pass  ;"  of 
course,  you  believe  that  God  originally  designed  death.  But, 
that  God  designed  death  for  the  good  of  mankind,  I  do  not 
know  it  to  be  an  article  of  your  faith,  and  therefore,  ma}', 
without  doing  you  any  injustice,  suppose  that  you  believed 
that  God  originally  designed  death,  but  not  for  the  good  of  man- 
kind !  Here,  sir,  I  acknowledge  that  my  sentiment  differs 
from  yours  ;  and  as  you  have  given  me  no  reason  why  God 
should  not  have  designed  death  for  the  s;ood  of  mankind,  I  have 
only  to  consider  the  "  friendly  admonition,"  with  which  you 
oppose  my  idea.  I  would  query  why  the  idea  that  God  should 
design  death  for  the  good  of  mankind  renders  me  justly  ad- 
monishable  ?  Would  the  idea,  should  1  avow  it,  that  God  de- 
signed death  for  the  damage  of  mankind,  render  me  commend- 
able ?  So,  it  seems  ;  but  at  this  expense  I  cannot  avoid  admo- 
nition !  I  would  further  query  what  interest  God  could  have 
consulted  which  required  him  to  design  death  for  a  damage  to 
Those  creatures  whom  he  made  subject  to  death  ?    And  I  think 


214  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

it  expedient  to  ask  how  God  can  be  justified,  in  the  sight  oi' 
his  rational  creatures,  if  the  idea  be  once  established  that  he 
designed  evil  against  them,  even  before  they  existed? 

I  feel  it  to  be  my  duty,  dear  sir,  to  call  on  you  to  support 
this  high  allegation  against  the  Father  of  our  spirits.  I  would 
not  pretend  that  you  designed  to  bring  an  allegation  against 
cur  Creator,  but  1  am  satisfied  that  every  unprejudiced  mind 
must  see  the  nature  of  an  allegation  in  what  jou  are  disposed 
to  maintain.  For  if  we  say,  God,  our  Creator,  designed  death 
for  the  damage  of  those  dependent  beings  whom  he  has  made, 
it  is  giving  him  a  character  which,  I  believe,  the  wisest  of 
men  would  find  it  difficult  to  justify. 

Again,  if  the  notion  be  true,  that  God  designed  death  for  the 
damage  of  mankind,  is  it  not  from  hence  evident  that  he  was 
an  enemy  to  mankind  when  he  thus  designed  ?  Now,  if  God 
be  considered  an  enemy  to  mankind  even  before  he  made 
them,  I  wish  to  know  what  reason  can  be  given  why  mankind 
ought  to  love  God  since  creation  ? 

In  relation  to  a  number  of  scriptures  which  you  have  quot- 
ed, seemingly  with  a  design  to  illustrate  the  foregoing  subject, 
I  can  only  say,  that  if  any  or  all  those  passages  relate  at  all  to 
the  subject,  that  relation  is  out  of  my  sight.  And  I  can  truly 
say,  that  I  am  glad  that  there  is  nothing,  in  any  part  of  the 
scripture,  so  contrary  to  good  sense  and  reason  as  to  support 
the  notion  that  God  is  an  enemy  to  the  works  of  his  own  hands. 
I  believe,  sir,  if  I  prove  from  scripture  that  God  designed 
death  for  the  good  of  mankind,  it  must  be  considered  a  sub- 
stantial support  of  what  you  wish  to  oppose  ;  and  will  also  be 
considered  as  placing  the  scripture  doctrine  on  the  most 
reasonable  principle. 

1st.  I  will  show  that  death  is  not  a  token  of  God's  enmity 
towards  mankind.  As  a  proof  of  this,  see  Rom.  viii.  38,  39, 
k*  For  I  am  persuaded,  that  neither  death,  nor  life,  nor  angels, 
nor  principalities,  nor  powers,  nor  things  present,  nor  things  to 
come,  nor  height,  nor  depth,  nor  any  other  creature  shall  be  able 
10  separate  us  from  the  love  of  God  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus 
our  Lord."  This  passage  is  a  full  and  positive  proof  that 
neither  death  nor  any  thing  else,  is  a  token  of  God's  enmity 
to  mankind. 

2d.  I  wiLl  now  show  that  death  was  designed  by  God  for  the 
good  of  men.  Which  to  do,  I  must  learn  of  Jesus.  He  is  the 
truth.  Was  his  death  designed,  by  the  eternal  Father,  for  the 
good  of  mankind,  or  not  ?  Was  his  death  a  token  of  God's 
lore  to  the  world,  or  was  it  a  token  of  his  enmity  ?  See  Rom. 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  215 

v.  U,  "  But  God  com  mend e?/t  his  love  towards  us  in  that  while 
we  were  yet  sinners  Christ  died  for  us."  This  same  apostle, 
believing  in  Christ,  who,  he  says,  was  delivered  for  our  of- 
fences, -and  was  raised  again  for  our  justification,  in  a  short, 
but  comprehensive  inventory -of  the  thing's  which  arc  ours,  has 
placed  death  among  them.  See  lCor.  iii.  21,  2^?,  23,  "  There- 
fore, let  no  man  glory  in  men  :  for  all  things  are  yours  : 
whether  Paul,  or  Apollos,  or  Cephas,  or  the  world,  or  life, 
or  death,  or  thing's  present,  or  thing's  to  come  :  all  are  yours  ; 
and  ye  are  Christ's;  and  Christ  is  God's."  Again,  he  says, 
to  the  Phil.  i.  21,  "  For  me  to  live  is  Christ,  and  to  die  is  gain.'''' 
Nothing  appears  more  evident  than  that  the  death  of  Christ 
was  designed  for  the  good  of  mankind  ;  and  as  he  is  the  head 
of  every  man,  so  his  death  is  considered,  in  the  scriptures,  a 
gracious  benefit  to  every  man  ;  as  the  apostle  expresses  it, 
"  That  he,  by  the  grace  of  God.  should  taste  death  for  every 
man."  And  again,  "  As  in  Adam  all  die,  even  so  it)  Christ, 
shall  all  be  made  alive."  Who  can  impartially  consider  those 
scriptures  and  suppose  that  God  designed  death  for  a  damage 
to  mankind  ?  I  view  death,  sir,  as  an  appointment  of  God.  a 
friendly  messenger,  sent  to  dissolve  a  tabernacle  of  corruption 
and  vanity,  at  the  dissolution  of  which,  "the  dust  returns  to 
the  earth  as  it  was,  and  the  spirit  unto  God  who  gave  it." 

Your  admonition  in  the  next  place  suggests,  that  "  if"  I 
"  will  read  the  whole  chapter  (meaning  the  3d  chapter  of  the 
1st  of  John)  and  seriously  consider  it,  and  pray  to  God,  through 
Jesus  Christ,  to  open"  my  "  understanding,  that"  I  "  may  un- 
derstand the  scriptures,"  I  "  would  not  misapply  and  pervert 
them,  as"  you  M  fear"  1  •"  do." 

Rev.  Sir,  are  you  sufficiently  acquainted  with  my  preaching 
and  writing  on  the  scriptures  to  warrant  the  propriety  of  the 
suggestion,  that  I  am  in  the  habit  of  misapplying  and  pervert' 
ing  the  holy  writings?  Are  you  sufficiently  acquainted  with 
any  retired  studies  and  religious  exercises  to  warrant  the  sug- 
gestion that  I  get  along  without  acknowledging  the  wisdom  of 
God  ?  1  humbly  request  you  to  reconsider  this  part  of  your 
admonition,  and  see  if  it  do  not  wear  the  appearance  of  judging 
mother  who  rnjust  stand  or  fall  to  his  own  master.  In  the 
mean  time  I  wish  to  observe,  that  a  friendly  advice  to  be  con- 
stant in  fervent  supplication  and  prayer  would  be  received  by 
me  as  a  mark  of  christian  friendship  and  fellowship.  But  I 
will  ask  you  the  question,  if  you  would  be  willing  to  have  me 
go  into  your  desk  with  you  in  presence  of  your  church  and 
congregation,  and  there  read  the  whole  of  the  above  named 


216  SERIES    OF    LETTER?. 

chapter,  then  in  humble  and  solemn  prayer  to  Almighty  GoU, 
through  Christ  Jesus,  implore  a  jusi  and  true  understanding 
of  his  word  and  truth  contained  in  that  portion  oi'his  written 
will,  and  close  my  penformance  with  a  candid  dissertation  on 
the  chapter?  Grant  me  liberty  to  do  this  in  your  hearing; 
alter  which  I  will  not  object  to  your  pointing  out  any  misap- 
plication or  perversion  which  you  may  think  you  discover. 
By  what  law  is  a  man  condemned  without  first  hearing  his 
defence  ? 

Again,  your  admonition  suggests,  that  I  did  not,  at  either  of 
the  funerals  where  you  heard  me  perform,  speak  one  word 
of  the  necessity  or  nature  of  repentance.  In  this  particular  I 
believe  you  made  a  mistake  at  both  places,  which  mistake,  I 
believe  1  can  rectify  to  your  recollection.  In  the  first  place. 
I  wish  to  observe  that  1  as  much  believe  in  those  scriptures 
which  speak  of  the  necessity  of  repentance  as  I  do  in  any  part 
of  the  sacred  writings.  But,  after  all,  you  and  I  may  enter- 
tain very  different  ideas  respecting  the  preaching  of  repen- 
tance. The  opinion  that  repentance  is  preached  when  a  pub- 
lic speaker  telis  his  congregation  that  their  eternal  salvation 
depends  on  their  repentance,  that  eternal  misery  must  inevi- 
tably be  their  doom  unless  they  repent  is  an  opinion  to 
which  1  have  no  reason  to  subscribe. 

Preaching  repentance,  I  conceive  is  teaching  men  and  giving 
them  such  divine  instructions  as  bring  their  minds  to  discover 
more  glorious  thing's  than  the  sins  and  carnal  vanities  of  this 
world  ;  which  teaching  produces  a  returning  of  the  mind  to 
the  things  of  God  and  his  ever  blessed  kingdom.  The  word 
repent  may  or  may  not  be  used  in  the  giving  of  such  instruc- 
tions. I  conceive  a  preacher  of  Jesus  Christ,  warmed  with 
the  spirit  of  eternal  love,  breathing  forth  the  gracious  words 
of  truth,  may  successfully  preach  repentance  as  well  without 
the  use  of  the  word  repent  as  with  it.  At  both  those  places 
of  sorrow,  dear  sir,  I  endeavoured  to  lead  the  mourners1 
minds  to  the  consideration  of  eternal  things  ;  I  endeavoured  to 
represent  God  our  Creator  and  Governor,  as  a  friend  to  hif 
creatures,  and  strove  to  the  utmost  of  my  power  to  fix  the 
love,  regard  and  confidence  of  our  mourning  friends  on  God 
our  Creator.  Thi3  you  will  recollect,  and  I  cannot  suppose 
that  you  believe  that  a  person  can  truiy  believe  in  the  divine 
goodness,  and  love  his  Creator  as  the  greatest  good,  and  put 
confidence  in  him,  so  as  to  draw  consolation,  in  the  day  of 
adversity,  from  such  confidence,  and  still  be  a  stranger  to 
true  penitence. 


SERIES    OF   LETTERS.  217 

The  many  scriptures  which  you  have  judiciously  quoted 
o  prove  the  propriety  of  the  doctrine  ftf  repentance  are 
justly  applied,  as  I  conceive  ;  and  I  accord  with  you  in  their 
use  and  meaning  as  far  as  you  have  explained  them.  I 
would  wish  to  be  understood  that  whenever  repentance  is 
spoken  of  as  a  creature  act,  originating  in  creatnrp.  agency, 
it  is  represented  directly  contrary  to  the  scripture  sense  as 
expressed  in  Acts  v.  31,  "  Him  hath  God  exalted  with  his 
right  hand  to  be  a  Prince  and  a  Saviour,  for  to  give  repentance 
to  Israel  and  forgiveness  of  sins." 

From  the  above  passage  it  is  evident  that  repentance  is  no 
more  dependent  on  creature  agency  than  the  forgiveness  of 
«ins ;  and  the  idea  that  repentance  is  a  grant  of  divine  favour 
is  plainly  expressed  in  Acts  xi.  1&,  u  Then  hath  God  also,  to 
the  Gentiles,  granted  repentance  unto  life."  By  the  above 
testimonies  the  idea  that  repentance  is  a  creature  condition, 
on  which  the  divine  favour  is  bestowed,  is  proved  erro- 
neous. 

The  next  particular  which  your  M  friendly  admonition" 
jeeupies,  is  the  subject  of  Universal  Salvation  in  the  following 
words :  "  I  could  not  but  observe  with  what  emphasis  you,  at 
the  grave,  mentioned  those  selected  texts  of  scripture  which 
you  supposed  would  confirm  your  hearers  in  the  doctrine  of 
Universal  Salvation.  Would  Christ  or  the  apostles  preach 
Universal  Salvation  in  one  place  of  scripture,  and  in  another 
contradict  it  ?  I  believe  they  would  not."  In  the  above  par- 
ticular, sir,  I  agree,  with  you  in  all  which  you  express.  I 
do  not  believe  that  Christ  or  any  of  his  apostles  ever  contra- 
dicted the  glorious  doctrine,  in  which  they  all  preached 
Universal  Salvation.  And  until  this  contradiction  can  be 
shewn  in  their  preaching,  you  and  I  have  full  liberty  to  be- 
lieve in  God  as  "  the  Saviour  of  all  men."  Christ  gave  him- 
self a  ransom  for  all  men  ;  tasted  death  for  every  man ;  is 
the  propitiation  for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world.  He  says  he 
will  draw  all  men  unto  him,  and  he  also  says  that  Ci  him  that 
cometh  unto  me  I  will  in  no  wise  cast  out."  St.  Paul  says 
that  God  will  have  all  men  to  be  saved  and  to  come  unto  the 
knowledge  of  the  truth.  To  which  testimony  we  might  add 
an  immense  number  of  scriptures  from  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments  ;  and  as  you  agree  that  Christ  and  his  apostles 
would  not  preach  Universal  Salvation  in  one  place,  and  con- 
tradict it  in  another,  so  you  must,  of  necessity  subscribe  to 
the  uniformity  of  the  scripture  doctrine  in  the  Salvation  of 
all  men. 

19 


218  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

You  inform  me,  that  you  are  an  "  old  man  ;"  tins  I  was 
sensible  of  before,  in  consequence  of  which,  I  have  more  par- 
ticularly endeavoured  to  cultivate  an  acquaintance  with  you, 
since  I  have  been  in,  this  town  ;  for  I  conceive  that  the  aged 
are  not  only  entitled  to  the  respects  and  attention  of  the 
younger,  but  the  younger  are  also  entitled  to  the  advantages 
of  their  experience  and  wisdom. 

You  further  tell  me,  that  you  have  studied  the  scriptures 
twenty  or  thirty  years.  On  this  account,  sir,  I  covet  earn- 
estly your  assistance  ;  for  although  I  have  studied  the  scrip- 
tures almost  constantly  twenty  years  out  of  less  than  forty, 
yet  I  find  but  a  few  who  are  not  able  to  assist  me  in  this  agree- 
able employment.  The  happy  method  which  you  recom- 
mend, I  have  for  many  years  endeavoured  to  observe,  for  I 
am  sure  that  most  of  the  vulgar  errors,  in  respect  to  the 
scriptures,  are  for  the  want  of  a  careful  examination  of  all 
which  is  said  on  the  same  subjects. 

Wherein  you  recommend  the  pious  example  of  the  prophet 
David,  1  fully  accord  in  it,  and  would  humbly  hope  and  strive 
to  be  a  partaker  of  the  benefits  arising  from  such  an  ex- 
ample. 

What  you  say  of  men's  explaining  scripture  in  their  own 
strength  and  wisdom,  and  of  their  making  havoc  of,  and  mang- 
ling them  by  explaining  them  in  a  mystical  or  literal  sense, 
I  find  myself  rather  embarrassed  about.  You  begin  your 
epistle  under  the  character  of  a  "  friendly  admonition,"  but 
what  you  mean  by  accusing  me  of  the  folly  of  mangling  and 
making  havoc  of  the  scriptures  when  you  do  not  attempt  to 
show  wherein  I  ever  explained  a  passage  wrong,  I  must  leave 
for  you  to  explain  when  it  is  convenient.  Nor  is  it  easy  for 
me  to  understand  you  when  you  represent  both  the  mystical 
and  literal  explanation  of  scripture  equally  erroneous.  You 
immediately  conclude  those  observations  with  the  following 
quotation  :  M  The  natural  man  receiveth  not  the  things  of  the 
spirit  of  God,  for  they  are  foolishness  unto  him."  Did  you 
mean  that  the  natural  man,  supposing  the  things  of  the  spirit 
of  God  to  be  foolishness,  would  say  that  the  spirit  mangled 
and  made  havoc  of  the  scriptures  ?  This  could  not  be  your 
meaning. 

Your  concluding  query  is  the  following ;  "  My  friend,  is 
there  the  least  room  for  us  to  believe  from  this  scripture 
(meaning  2  Cor.  v.  10,  11)  and  many  others,  that  the  wicked 
vcho  have  lived  impenitent  and  in  a  disbelief  of  the  gospel,  or 
without  the  true  knowledge  of  God,  and   of  Jesus  Christ 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  219 

whom  God  hath  sent,  have  eternal  life  in  the  fruition  and 
enjoyment  of  God  !"  This  query  I  will  endeavour  to  answer 
as  plainly  as  possible. 

1st.  Unless  we  grant  that  a  man  has  eternal  life  in  Jesus 
Christ,  given  him  before  the  foundation  of  the  world,  we  can- 
not justly  call  him  an  unbeliever  because  he  does  not  believe 
he  has  this  eternal  life  in  Christ.  Nor  can  we  say,  with  the 
least  propriety,  that  he  does  not  know  the  truth,  because  he 
does  not  know  that  which  is  not. 

2d.  If  we  allow  that  a  man  has  eternal  life  in  Christ,  we 
must  allow  him  to  be  an  unbeliever  if  he  do  not  believe  it ; 
and  that  he  docs  not  know  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus,  if -he  be 
ignorant  of  this  gift  of  eternal  life. 

3d.  While  a  man  is  in  a  state  of  unbelief  he  is  not  in  the 
cnjoyme?it  of  the  truth. 

I  conceive,  sir,  these  observations  must  appear  reasonable 
to  any  reasonable  man;  and  therefore  1  suppose  they  will 
appear  reasonable  to  you. 

The  passage  in  Corinthians  alluded  to,  fully  refutes  the  no- 
tion of  endless  rewards  and  punishments;  for  there  it  is  stat- 
ed, that  "  every  one  may  receive  the  things  done  in  his  body, 
according  to  that  he  hath  done,  whether  it  be  good  or  bad.55 
Now  as  this  same  apostle  tells  us  that  all  have  sinned  and 
come  short  of  the  glory  of  God,  if  he  mean  that  all  who  have 
sinned  must  be  endlessly  punished,  he  cannot  mean  that  any 
of  the  human  race  will  be  eternally  blessed  according  to  their 
own  works,  nor  yet  according  to  the  grace  of  God.  And  you, 
sir,  cannot  but  see  if  one  sinner  can  be  rewarded  according  to 
his  works  and  yet  be  saved  by  grace  through  faith,  and  that 
not  of  himself,  but  by  the  gift  of  God,  all  the  sinners  of  Ad- 
am's race  may  be  thus  rewarded  according  to  what  they  have 
done  either  good  or  bad,  and  yet  be  saved  by  grace  as  above. 

Your  suggestions  respecting  the  resurrection  require  no 
other  answer  than  that  I  profess  to  believe  in  the  doctrine  of 
the  resurrection  as  taught  by  the  scriptures,  though  I  cannot 
Hatter  myself  that  that  opinion  agrees  with  the  opinion  of 
wiiat  you  call  sound  authors.  For  myself,  I  call  the  writers 
of  the  holy  scriptures  sound  authors,  and  those  who  differ 
from  them  I  am  willing  to  call  orthodox  according"  to  our 
common  schools  of  divinity.  I  join  with  you  in  a  humble  de- 
sire that  the  holy  breathings  of  the  true  children  of  God  may 
be  yours  and  mine  ;  and  I  am  sensible  if  they  be  we  shall  not 
judge  one  another,  nor  condemn  one  another  ;  but  strive  fev 
the  unity  of  the  spirit  in  the  bonds  of  divine  peace.     Ye?,  sir. 


220  SERIES   OF    LETTERS. 

J  am  confident  that  the  true  temper  and  spirit  of  the  gospeh 
if  possessed  and  practiced  by  the  public  ministers  in  this  town, 
would  lead  them  to  open  their  doors  to  each  other,  to  meet 
together  and  pray,  preach,  sing  and  exhort,  in  love  and  fel- 
lowship ;  but  Antichrist's  spirit  is  directly  the  reverse. 

The  assurance  you  give  me  in  yonr  postscript,  that  what 
you  wrote  to  me  was  not  written  in  an  envious  spirit  is  duly 
appreciated  ;  nor  do  I  much  wonder  that  you  do  not  envy  me 
the  numbers  who  attend  my  public  ministry,  while  you  sup- 
pose that  they  with  innumerable  multitudes  of  others  are  re- 
probated to  endless  sin  and  misery.  Envy,  in  such  a  case,, 
would  be  truly  unaccountable  !  I  will  not  say  that  I  fully  com- 
prehend your  meaning  in  calling  the  "great  numbers"  who 
attend  my  meeting,  M  precious  souls."  Why  are  they  pre- 
cious? To  whom  are  they  precious?  If  you  view  them 
>he  objects  of  divine  love,  of  course  you  must  suppose  them 
to  be  precious  in  God's  sight  ,*  but  if  not,  why  do  you  call 
thetn  precious  ? 

Your  flattering  acknowledgements  of  civilities  received 
:Vcrn  me  and  the  acceptableness  of  my  person  to  you,  is  very 
gratefully  considered,  for  it  is  an  object  with  me  to  deserve 
tne  approbation  of  the  pious  who  have  treasured  up  much 
valuable  knowledge  by  experience  ;  and  I  wish  to  give  you 
ihe  fullest  assurance  possible  that  I  consider  my  acquaintance 
with  yourself  highly  worthy  of  further  cultivation  and  im- 
provement, which  I  shall  always  endeavour  to  promote,  as 
opportunity  may  present,  and  it  shall  please  you  to  favour. 

Having  noted  the  most  important  sections  of  your  "  friend- 
ly admonition"  in  as  concise  a  manner  as  was  convenient, 
permit  me,  dear  sir,  to  make  a  few  observations  on  the  doc- 
trine of  Universal  Salvation,  that  being  a  subject  to  which 
you  allude  in  your  epistle,  though  you  did  not  see  fit  to  plant 
uny  particular  arguments  against  it.  This  doctrine  I  openly 
profess,  and  preach  as  a  doctrine  which  I  conceive  is  plainly 
taught  in  the  scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  ;  a 
doctrine  which  all  good  men  fb  the  world  desire  the  truth  of; 
a  doctrine  the  most  worthy  of  God  of  any  ever  published  ;  a 
doctrine  the  best  calculated  to  fill  the  soul  of  the  believer 
vfith  love  to  God  and  to  our  fellow  creatures;  a  doctrine 
which  harmonizes  the  divine  attributes,  the  scriptures  and 
every  principle  of  reason  and  good  sense,  in  a  surprising  and 
an  astonishing  manner  ;  a  doctrine,  more  than  any  other,  cal- 
culated to  destroy  the  hurtful  animosities  existing  in  the  reli- 
gious world,  and  to  produce  general  fellowship  and  brotherly 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  221 

love  ;  and  in  a  word,  I  believe  it  to  be  the  only  doctrine 
which  can  be  supported  by  reason  or  scripture,  to  a  mind  not 
improperly  biased  by  tradition.  Though  I  am  sensible  of 
your  greater  experience,  yet  I  am  willing  to  say  to  a  man  of 
your  piety  and  christian  candor,  that  any  arguments  which 
you  should  see  cause  to  lay  before  me,  on  the  above  subject, 
shall,  by  the  blessing  of  God,  receive  an  early  attention  and 
a  judicious  discussion. 

In  the  spirit  of  the  New  Testament  and  not  in  the  letter, 
in  the  spirit  of  life,  and  not  in  the  death  of  the  letter,  in  the 
spirit  of  salvation,  and  not  of  condemnation,  I  pray  God,  I  may 
ever  live  and  act  according  to  your  friendly  desire  ;  and  feel- 
ing the  same  fervent  desire  for  my  highly  esteemed  and  ven- 
erable friend,  I  acknowledge  myself  your  most  obliged  and 
verv  humble  servant,  for  Christ's  sake. 

HOSEA  BALLOU. 
Rev.  JosErH  Walton. 

P.  S.  I  have  reserved  three  particulars  in  your  "friendly 
admonition"  for  the  subject  of  another  communication. 


LETTER  III. 

from  the  same  to  the  same. 

Portsmouth,  Jan.  5,  1811. 

Rev.  Sir, — Having  notified  you  in  a  postscript  of  my  letter 
of  Dec.  I  lth,  that  I  had  reserved  three  particulars  in  your 
"  friendly  admonition"  for  the  subject  of  another  communi- 
cation, 1  am  disposed  to  embrace  this  opportunity  to  fulfil  my 
engagement.  The  three  particulars  reserved  are  expressed, 
in  your  letter,  in  the  following  words  : 

■  For  the  time  will  come  when  they  will  not  endure  sound 
doctrine,  but  after  their  own  lusts  shall  they  heap  to  them- 
selves teachers  having  itching  ears  ;  and  they  shall  turn 
away  their  ears  from  the  truth,  and  shall  be  turned  unto  fa- 
bles. You,  my  friend,  once  professed  the  true  faith  of  the 
gospel — have  you  kept  it?  I  think  not.  I  fear  you  have 
apostatised  from  it.  You  are  now  preaching  a  doctrine  which 
pleases  the  world,  but  it  makes  against  you  according  to 
scripture.  The  apost'e  John  say9  in  hi3  1st  epistle  4th 
chapter  5th  and  6th  verses.  The}'  are  of  the  world  ;  there- 
fore the  world  heareth  them  ;  we  are  of  God  ;  he  that  know- 
eth  God,  heareth  us,  he  that  is  not  of  God,  heareth  not  us: 
h£reby  know  we  the  spirit  of  truth  and  the  spirit  of  error" 
19* 


222  SERIES    OF    LETTERS* 

I  would  not,  dear  sir,  knowingly  misapply  your  words,  nor 
make  a  use  of  the  above  quotation  contrary  to  its  most 
plain  and  evident  sense  which  L  conceive  is  as  follows: 

1st.  The  doctrine  which  I  believed  before  I  believed  as  1 
do  now,  is  the  true  gospel  according  to  the  testimony  of  the 
apostle  John,  in  his  1st  epistle,  4th  chapter  5th  and  6th  verses. 

2d.  That  in  believing  as  I  now  do,  I  have  apostatised 
from  that  faith,  and  turned  unto  fables. 

3d.  My  now  preaching  a  doctrine  which  pleases  the  world 
is  good  proof  that  my  doctrine  is  not  of  God,  and  that  those 
who  hear  me  are  justly  described  by  the  apostle  as  heaping 
to  themselves  teachers  having  itching  ears. 

In  the  first  place  I  shall  agree  with  you  in  the  supposition 
that  when  I  first  made  a  profession  of  religion,  I  believed 
the  true  gospel. 

In  the  second  place  I  shall  endeavour  to  show  that  I  have 
not  apostatised  from  that  faith,  and 

In  the  third  place  I  will  attempt  to  show  that  the  evidence, 
which  you  think  makes  against  me,  is  by  no  means  sufficient 
to  prove  that  the  doctrine  I  now  believe  and  preach  is  con- 
sistent with  the  lusts  of  the  world  or  contrary  to  the  true 
faith  of  the  gospel. 

1st.  The  true  faith  of  the  gospel  as  expressed  in  1  John, 
4th,  &c.  is  as  follows — see  verse  2,  3,  M  Every  spirit  that 
confesseth  that  Jesus  Christ  is  come  in  the  flesh  is  of  God ; 
and  every  spirit  that  confesseth  not  that  Jesus  Christ  is  come 
in  the  tlesh  is  not  of  God."  The  apostle  here  states  in  the 
most  simple  terms  the  true  christian  faith,  and  brings  it  into 
such  a  short  compass  that  none  can  mistake  him.  The  be- 
lief that  Jesus  Christ  is  come  in  the  flesh  is  the  true  faith, 
and  a  denial  of  that  fact  is  a  false  faith. 

When  I  first  professed  religion  I  professed  to  believe  that 
"  Jesus  Christ  is  come  in  the  flesh  ;"  and  this  I  am  willing  to 
say  new  is  the  true  faith  of  the  gospel,  and  the  only  article 
of  faith  which  constituted  a  christian  believer  in  the  opinion 
of  the  apostles  ;  restricting  this  belief,  at  the  same  time,  to 
Jesus  of  Nazareth,  that  he  was  the  Christ. 

2d.  I  as  much  believe  now  as  I  ever  did  that  Jesus  Christ 
^is  come  in  the  flesh.  I  have  as  clear  evidences  now  as  I 
ever  had  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  is  the  Christ.  These  things 
being  facts,  the  conclusion  is  that  I  have  not  apostatised  from 
the  true  christian  faith. 

3d.  The  above  faith  I  preach,  believing  and  testifying  that 
God  sent  his  Son  to  be  the  Saviour  of  the  world;  and  I  have 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  223 

reason  to  bless  God  that  such  feeble  means  are  at  ail  pros- 
pered, and  that  as  you  observe,  "  Great  numbers  of  precious 
Souls"  adhere  to  the  word,  which  I  conceive  is  no  evidence 
that  the  faith  I  preach  is  not  of  God,  or  that  it  is  consistent 
with  the  lusts  of  the  world.  We  are  informed  in  the  word  of 
God,  that  the  common  people  heard  Christ  gladly.  Who  did 
not  hear  him  gladly?  Answer,  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees. 
Do  you  think,  sir,  that  the  common  people's  hearing  Christ 
gladly  was  a  justifinble  evidence  to  the  Pharisees  that  he  was 
not  the  true  Messiah  ?  When  many  thousands  of  men,  wo- 
men, and  children  flocked  from  their  cities  into  desert  places 
to  hear  the  gracious  words  which  proceeded  from  the  lips 
of  him  who  spake  as  never  man  spake,  was  it  a  justifiable 
evidence  that  he  and  his  doctrine  were  not  of  God?  To 
bring  this  matter,  if  possible,  nearer  home,  should  you  find 
your  meeting  house  crowded  with  hearers  who  expressed  in 
their  countenances  an  approbation  of  the  doctrine  which  you 
preach,  would  it  be  sufficient  evidence  to  convince  you  that 
your  doctrine  was  not  of  God  ? 

That  the  testimony  that  God  sent  his  Son  to  he  the  Sav- 
iour of  the  zvorld  is  not  consistent  with  the  lusts  of  the  world, 
is  shown  by  St.  Paul  to  Titus  ;  ;t  For  the  grace  of  God  which 
bringeth  salvation  to  all  men,  hath  appeared,  teaching  us, 
that  denying  ungodliness  and  worldly  lusts,  we  should  live 
soberly,  righteously  and  godly  in  this  present  world." 

I  have  not  the  least  doubt  in  my  mind,  that  if  you  and  * 
preached  more  like  our  blessed  master  than  we  do,  people 
in  general,  would  be  more  engaged  to  hear  us,  and  our  meet- 
ing houses  would  be  more  thronged  than  they  are  now. 

Should  you  hear  a  shepherd  complaining  that  the  increase 
of  his  flock  was  small,  or  that  it  rather  diminished,  you  would 
think  that  evidence  made  against  him. 

1  suppose  the  particular  idea  which  you  had  in  view, 
which  constitutes,  in  your  mind,  an  Apostacy,  is,  that  Jesus 
Christ,  who  was  manifested  in  the  flesh,  will,  pursuant  to 
power  given  to  him  of  his  father,  save  all  men  from  their 
sins,  and  reconcile  all  things  unto  himself.  This  idea,  I  ac- 
knowledge, I  did  not  see  clearly  when  I  first  made  a  pro- 
fession of  a  belief  in  Christ  ;  but  now  am  fully  persuaded  in 
it.  However,  1  cannot  see  why  the  adopting  of  this  particu- 
lar idea  should  be  called  an  Apostacy. 

I  will,  sir,  mention  some  similar  cases,  not  wishing  how- 
ever, to  be  considered  an  equal  subject  with  the  personage 
.vhom  I  shall  introduce.     The  apostle  Peter  was  a  believr- 


224  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

in  the  true  faith  of  the  gospel,  that  is,  he  believed  that  Jesu« 
wm  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God  :  and  Jesus  says  to 
him,  on  that  confession,  that  flesh  and  blood  had  not  revealed 
it  to  him,  but  his  Father.  This  belief  Peter  had  before  he 
believed  that  Christ  should  suffer  on  the  cross  and  rise  from 
the  dead.  After  many  trials  and  dreadful  temptations  i:i 
which  this  poor,  dependent  brother  of  ours  experienced  the 
falibility  of  all  human  strength,  he  was  privileged  with  pos- 
itive evidence  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ  from  the  dead. — 
Here  1  ask,  was  this  new  acquisition  in  Peter's  faith  an  apos- 
tacy  ?  Was  it  not  an  advancement  ?  You  will  agree  with 
me  in  this. 

Again,  this  same  apostle,  even  after  lie  was  endowed  with 
power  from  on  high,  and  preached  and  healed  in  the  name 
of  Jesus,  did  not  know  that  the  Gentiles  were  fellow  heirs 
;md  of  the  same  body,  and  partakers  of  the  promises  of  God^ 
in  Christ,  by  the  gospel.  It  was  not  until  the  angel  of  the 
Lord  appeared  unto  Cornelius  and  directed  him  to  send  for 
Peter,  that  God  gave  to  that  apostle  the  knowledge  of  the 
fact  Which  be  acknowledged  to  Cornelius,  that  God  had 
shewed  him  that  he  should  call  no  man  common  or  unclean* 
It  is  very  evident  that  the  apostle  Peter  had  more  extensive 
knowledge  of  the  gospel  of  the  grace  of  God  in  consequence 
of  the  vision  of  the  sheet  by  the  sea  of  Joppa  than  he  had  be- 
fore ;  but  would  any  real  christian,  knowing  all  the  circum- 
stances, suppose  that  Peter  had  apostatized  from  the  true 
*aith,  because  he  believed  that  millions  would  be  benefited 
by  Christ  more  than  were  comprehended  in  his  former  be- 
lief? While  they,  who  were  of  the  circumcision  remained 
'gnorant  of  the  revelation  given  to  Peter,  we  find  they  u  con- 
tended with  him,  saying,  thou  wentest  in  to  men  uncircum- 
«;ised,  and  didst  eat  with  them.,v  But  when  Peter  had  "  re- 
hearsed the  matter  from  the  beginning,  and  expounded  it  by 
order  unto  them,  they  held  their  peace  and  glorified  God, 
saying,  then  hath  God  also  to  the  Gentiles,  granted  repentance 
unto  life.""  Thus  we  see  that  the  church  in  Jerusalem,  who 
were  of  the  circumcision,  though  believers  in  Christ  were, 
until  Peter's  defence  further  enlightened  them,  ignorant  of 
the  extension  of  divine  grace  to  the  Gentiles  through  the  gos- 
pel. But  surely  no  real  christian  would  suppose  that  this 
enlargement  of  their  faith  in  the  great  salvation  was  an  apos- 
tacy  from  the  true  faith  ! 

With  profound  deference,  sir,  permit  me  to  suggest,  that 
should  the  foregoing  observations  present  yourself,  to  vow- 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  22£ 

o-ivn  mind,  in  a  similar  situation  with  those  of  the  circumci- 
sion, yet  they  acknowledge  you  a  belinver  in  Christ,  a  min- 
ister of  his  word  and  a  candidate  for  greater  manifestation*  of 
that  grace  of  God  by  which  Jesus  lasted  death  for  every 
man. 

I  believe  I  may  venture  to  say  that  unless  the  belief  that 
Godis  not  the  Saviour  of  all  men  can  be  maintained  by  posi- 
tive scripture  as  an  essential  article  of  apostolic  faith,  I  can- 
not be  justly  admonished  tor  apostatising  from  the  true  faith. 
May  I  not,  with  great  propriety,  call  on  my  Rev.  friend  to 
show,  if  he  can,  that  such  an  article  of  faith  was  ever  requir- 
ed by  Christ  or  his  apostles  as  a  term  of  christian  fellowship, 
and  charity  ? 

Let  us  look  into  the  written  word  of  God  and  see  what  is 
there  required  of  us  to  believe.  See  Rom.  x.  9,  "  If  thoir 
shalt  confess  with  thy  mouth  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  shalt  be- 
lieve in  thine  heart  that  God  hath  raised  him  from  the  dead, 
thou  shalt  be  saved."  Acts  viii.  37,  "  And  Philip  said  if 
thou  believest  with  all  thine  heart  thou  mayest.  And  he 
answered  and  said,  I  believe  that  Jesus  Christ  is  the  Son  of 
God."  Matt.  x.  32.  tl  Whosoever,  therefore,  shall  confess 
me  before  men,  him  will  I  confess  also  before  my  father 
which  is  in  heaven."  Luke  xii.  8,  "  Also  I  say  unto  you, 
whosoever  shall  confess  me  before  men,  him  shall  the  Son 
of  man  also  confess  before  the  angels  of  God."  Not  to 
multiply  quotations,  permit  me  to  query  whether  there  be  in 
those  passages,  or  in  any  other  scripture  on  the  same  point 
any  intimations  given  that  the  candidate  must  believe  that 
this  precious  Saviour  will  not,  through  the  peace  made  by 
the  blood  of  his  cross,  reconcile  all  things  to  God  ?  Are 
you  fully  satisfied,  dear  sir,  that  you  are  authorised  to  ad- 
monish as  an  apostate,  one  who  confesses  with  his  mouth  the 
Lord  Jesus,  and  who  believes  in  his  heart  that  God  hath 
raised  him  from  the  dead  ?  Why  did  not  Philip  demand  of 
the  Eunuch  a  particular  confession  of  a  belief  in  limited  grace 
and  salvation  ?  \YTas  there  not  the  same  authority  to  require 
this  article  of  faith  then,  as  there  is  now  ?  If  Jesus  hath 
promised,  in  his  word,  that  he  will  confess  before  his  Father 
in  Heaven,  whosoever  confesseth  him  before  men  are  yon 
satisfied  with  the  authority  by  which  you  denounce,  disfel- 
lowship,  and  deny  those  little  ones  ?  The  thought  is  truly 
solemn  !  I  feel  a  chill  in  every  vein  of  my  body,  when  I 
consider  the  vain  traditions  of  a  corrupted  church,  in  which 
it  has  long  been  a  religious  habit  to  anathematise  those  who 


228  SERIES   OF    LETTERS. 

confess  Christ  before  men,   because  they  cannot  believe   in 
certain  tenets  never  required  by  Christ  or  his  apostles  ! 

Rev.  Sir,l  can  say  in  the  sincerity  of  my  soul, that  I  believe 
that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  is  the  true  Christ,  I  believe  him  to 
be  the  Son  of  the  living  God,  who  was  delivered  for  our 
offences  and  was  raised  again  for  our  justification.  And 
though  I  feel  myself  the  most  unworthy  of  the  subjects  of 
salvation,  yet  I  should  be  ungrateful  not  to  acknowledge  the 
goodness  of  God  mv  Saviour.  "Whatever  men  may  think  or 
say  of  me,  I  know  that  my  soul  experiences  joys  unspeakable 
in  sweet  meditations  on  the  glories  and  inexpressible  beau- 
ties of  my  Redeemer  ;  and  the  thought  that  I  am  owned  as 
his  child  before  the  angels  of  God,  is  infinitely  better  than  to 
receive  the  approbation  of  men  who  are  disposed  to  judge 
without  knowing  the  heart. 

If  the  christian  clergy  were  once  disposed  to  strip  their 
creeds  and  confessions  of  faith  till  they  were  reduced  to  the 
simplicity  that  is  in  Christ,  and  require  no  other  belief  than 
Christ  and  his  apostles  required,  there  would  be  an  end  at 
once  of  all  the  discord  and  animosity  which  have  wounded 
the  character  of  Christianity  for  ages.  And  the  prayer  of 
the  blessed  Jesus  would  be  fulfilled  in  the  oneness  of  all  who 
believe  in  him,  which  would  convince  the  world  that  the 
Father  sent  him. 

Although  you  have  not  yet  found  it  convenient  to  favour 
roe  with  any  observations  on  my  former  letter,  1  have  not 
done  expecting  it.  And  I  shall  endeavour  to  hold  myself  in 
readiness  to  pay  an  early  attention  to  any  communication 
which  shall  come  from  your  hand.  In  hopes  that  nothing 
contained  in  this  letter  will  be  considered  inconsistent  with 
the  true  spirit  of  a  humble  believer  in  Christ,  I  remain,  sir, 
your  humble  servant,  for  Christ's  sake. 

ROSEA  EALLOU. 
Kev.  Joseph  Walton. 


LETTER  IV. 

from  the  rev.  joseph  walton  to  the  rev.  hosea  ballov. 

Portsmouth,  Jan.  11,  1811. 

Sir, — I  have  received  your  answer  to  my  letter  sent  you, 

dated  Dec.  7,  1810,  and  now  desire  to  answer  it,  in  the  fear 

of  God,  in    as  concise  a  manner  as  I   am  capable,  agreeable 

to  the  scriptures   of  truth.     Sir,  I  thank  you  for  the  civili- 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  2Z7 

fic=  you  manifest  toward  me.  and  that  you  received  my  let- 
ter in  a  friendly  manner  as  I  think  I  sent  it,  wishing  it  might 
i)e  received  and  improved  for  your  benefit  ;  not  that  I  sup- 
posed that  I  was  capable  of  convincing  or  confuting  you  of 
what  1  conceive  to  be  erroneous  in  your  doctrine  or  princi- 
ples, but  relying  on  the  blessing  of  God  to  make  it  effectual 
for  your  everlasting  good,  and  those  you  profess  to  be  over 
in  the  Lord. 

I  shall  not  take  into  consideration  every  argument  you 
make  use  of,  but  shall  give  it  a  general  answer.  Since  I 
have  received  it  I  have  had  a  great  number  of  scriptures 
occuring  to  my  mind  which  I  might  rpiote  if  I  thought  expe- 
dient. In  the  first  place  you  speak  or  write  as  if  I  thought 
death  was  originally  designed  by  the  Almighty  for  the  dam- 
age of  mankind  ;  1  say  death  was  threatened  to  be  the  con- 
sequence, if  mankind  did  transgress  the  law  of  their  Crea- 
tor ;  our  first  parents  transgressed,  and  the  penalty  was  ex- 
ecuted according  to  the  threatening,  wt  Thou  sha!t  surely 
die  :"  they  were  condemned  to  die  ;  they  were  under  sen- 
tence of  death  ;  they  became  spiritually  dead,  immediately  ; 
ihey  lost  the  knowledge  of  their  Creator  ;  darkness  cover- 
ed their  minds  ;  they  endeavoured  to  hide  themselves  from 
God  among  the  trees  of  the  garden  ;  they  brought  misery 
upon  themselves  and  upon  their  posterity  ;  we  feel  the  wo- 
ful  effects  of  their  fall  and  apostacy  until  this  day  ;  by  na- 
ture we  are  spiritually  dead  ;  as  it  is  written,  u  you  hath 
he  quickened  who  were  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins."  Sir, 
if  there  is  a  law  made  by  our  legislature,  is  there  not  a  pen- 
alty annexed  unto  it ;  If  that  law  is  transgressed,  is  not  the 
person  who  transgressed  punished  some  way  or  other  ? — 
Yet  the  law  is  made  for  the  good  of  the  whole  ;  the  legis- 
lature is  not  to  be  impeached,  as  if  he  made  it  for  the  dam- 
age of  his  people,  whom  he  governs  ;  the  law-breaker  is  pun- 
ished either  in  his  own  person  or  his  surety,  though  the 
pain,  shame  and  punishment  is  for  the  damage  of  the  trans- 
gressor, yet  the  law  is  for  the  good  of  the  whole,  and  the 
law  maker  is  not  in  the- least  to  blame  ;  the  transgressor 
also,  if  he  repents  and  is  reformed,  is  benefited  by  it,  kc. 

I  think,  sir,  your  giving  your  hearers  encouragement  in 
your  preaching  that  Christ  will  save  them  all,  whether  they 
repent  and  believe  the  gospel  or  no,  is  of  a  dangerous  nature. 
Christ  has  said,  u  if  ye  believe  not  that  I  am  he  ye  shall  die 
in  your  sins,"  John  viii.  24.  Read,  if  you  please,  the  pro- 
ceeding context.     The  decrees  of  God,  you  say,  is  my  creed, 


228  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

and  that  I  believe  that  Gotl  foreordained  whatsoever  come* 
to  pass.  I  do  not  think  1  ever  told  you  so.  And  so  yon 
think  God  foreordained,  according1  to  my  creed,  death,  for  a 
damage  to  his  creatures.  I  have  said  death  is  punishment 
for  sin,  as  I  wrote,  and  I  can  maintain  it  from  scripture  ; 
death  was  introduced  by  sin  ;  the  person  that  lives  a  life  of 
*in  and  dies  without  regenerating  grace,  which  all  true  be- 
lievers in  Christ  have,  will  be  miserable,  and  be  "  punished 
with  everlasting  destruction  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord 
and  the  glory  of  his  power."  I  believe  every  true  believer 
is  a  true  pen:tent,  is  regenerated,  is  in  Christ  by  a  vital  union 
is  a  M  new  creature,"  and  that  those  persons  will  be  saved 
and  none  else,  according  to  the  doctrine  of  Christ  and  his 
apostles.  I  believe  that  God  the  Father  worketh  all  things 
according  to  the  council  of  his  own  will  ;  that  his  redeemed 
and  saved  people  should  be  to  his  glory.  You  say,  in  my 
writing  to  you,  I  said,  "  do  you  think  Christ  or  his  apostles 
would  preach  universal  salvation  in  one  place  of  scripture 
and  contradict  it  in  another  ?  I  believe  they  would  not." — 
Here  you  designedly,  1  think  mistake  ;  1  do  not  believe 
that  Christ  or  his  apostles  ever  didpreach  universal  salva- 
tion, that  is,  that  every  son  and  daughter  of  apostate  Adam, 
would  be  saved.  I  believe  that  this  gospel  of  the  kingdom 
is  to  be  preached  to  every  creature,  and  ,l  whosoever  believ- 
eth  and  is  baptized  shall  be'  saved  ;  but  he  that  believeth 
not  shall  be  damned."  Do  me  justice,  sir  ;  do  not  animad- 
vert upon  what  I  have  just  quoted,  as  if  I  think  our  Saviour 
is  to  be  understood  as  if  every  individual  would  have  the 
privilege  of  hearing  the  gospel.  I  conceive  that  the  apos- 
tles1 commission  runs  thus  :  "  Go  into  all  the  world  and 
preach  the  gospel  to  every  human  or  rational  creature." — 
What  I  meant  by  saying,  do  you  think  Christ  would  preach 
universal  salvation  in  one  place,  and  in  another  contradict  it, 
is,  that  those  texts  which  you  suppose  supports  your  doc- 
trine, is  not  to  be  understood  as  you  apply  them  ;  for  if  they 
prove  universal  salvation,  as  you  would  have  them,  then 
they  will  contradict  many  texts  which  Christ  and  his  apos- 
tles improved  otherwise  ;  therefore  I  still  assert,  that  the 
scriptures  ought  to  be  carefully  examined,  conscientiously 
improved  and  applied.  The  faithful  minister  of  Christ  will 
renounce  the  hidden  things  of  dishonesty,  not  walking  in 
craftiness,  nor  handling  the  word  of  God  deceitfully,  but  by 
manifestation  of  the  truth,  commending  himself  to  every 
man's  conscience  in  the  sight  of  God.     "  Forwe  are    not  as 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  229 

■m-any  which  corrupt  the  word  of  God  ;  but  as  of  sincerity, 
but  as  of  God,  in  the  sight  of  God,  speak  we  in  Christ." — 
See  2d  Corinthians,  ii.  17.  And  !  would  take  it  as  a  favour,  if 
you  would  read  the  15th  and  16th  verses  in  the  same  chap- 
ter, and  seriously  consider  them.  Those  texts  of  scripture 
which  you  have  quoted  from  Rom.  8th  chapter,  are  not  to 
be  applied  as  jou  apply  them,  neither  doth  the  apostle  ap- 
ply them  so.  And  metbinks  you  know  they  are  not,  if  you 
consider  the  connexion  from  the  28th  verse  of  the  chapter 
to  the  end.  And  that  passage  of  scripture  quoted  from  1 
Cor.  iii.  21,  22,  23,  is  only  to  be  applied  to  real  christians  .; 
and  this,  sir,  I  presume  you  know  ;  but  it  would  not  suit  you 
--uid  your  scheme  of  Universal  Salvation  to  apply  them  so. 

I  would  ask  you,  if,  when  I  am  writing  a  letter  or  an  epis- 
tle to  Mr.  Hosea  Ballou,  it  would  be  proper  for  me  to  apply 
what  I  write  m  particular  to  you,  concerning  your  affairs  or 
circumstances,  to  the  whole  world  ?  Ministers  of  Christ 
should  rightly  M  divide  the  word  ;'*  and  should  take  the 
precious  from  the  vile  ;  then  they  would  be  as  God's  mouth 
to  the  people.  See  Jeremiah  xv.  19,  see  likewise,  Ezekiel 
xliv.  23,  "  The  priests  of  the  Lord  are  to  teach  the  Lord's 
people  the  difference  between  the  holy  and  the  profane,  and 
cause  them  to  discern  between  the  unclean  and  the  clean  ;" 
it  is  by  this  general  way  of  preaching,  errors  are  introduced, 
not  only  by  your  denomination,  but  by  others  also.  I  could 
multiply  quotations  from  the  bible,  both  from  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments,  but  what  would  it  avail,  unless  you  will 
consider  them  and  endeavour  td  improve  them,  and  apply 
them  as  the  Holy  Ghost  would  have  us  to  ?  "  for  holy  men  of 
God  spake  *3  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost," 
see  2  Peter  i.  25.  You  say,  you  were  somewhat  em- 
barrassed in  understanding  what  I  meant  when  I  wrote  that 
men  undertaking  to  explain  the  scriptures  in  their  own 
strength  and  wisdom,  and  their  making  havoc  of  them,  &c. 
by  explaining  them  in  a  mystical  or  literal  sense.  I  will  en- 
deavour to  explain  what  I  meant — 1st.  To  allegorize  the 
scriptures  in  a  mere  moral  or  mystical  sense,  or  altogether  in 
a  figurative  sense,  is  a  degree  of  enthusiasm,  (as  to  say  there 
is  no  devil  but  our  carnal  nature,  fcc.)  and  in  a  mere  literal 
sense  is  to  understand  and  improve  them  not  in  that  spiritual 
sense  in  which  they  are  to  be  understood,  but  resting  in  the 
letter  only ;  as  we  may  observe  when  Christ  said  in  St.  John, 
Btfa  chapter,  u  Except  ye  eat  the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  man  and 
drink  his  blood,  ye  have  no  life  in  you  ;"  "  Whoso  eateth 
*20 


230  SERIES   OF    LETTERS. 

ray  flesh  and  drinketh  my  blood  hath  eternal  life,  and  i  wib 
raise  him  up  at  the  last  day  j"  "  These  things  said  he  in  the 
synagogue  as  he  taught  in  Capernaum  ;"  "  Many  therefore 
of  his  disciples  when  they  heard  this,  said,  this  is  a  hard  say- 
ing, who  can  hear  it?  Christ  said,  doth  this  offend  you? — 
And  informed  them  he  did  not  mean  that  they  should  eat  his 
human  flesh,  and  drink  his  blood  literally,  but  he  was  to  be 
understood  in  a  spiritual  sense.  He  informed  them  "  it  is 
the  spirit  that  quickeneth,  the  flesh  protiteth  nothing,  the 
words  I  speak  unto  you  they  are  spirit  and  life."  Some  have 
since  misunderstood  him,  and,  to  this  day,  misunderstand  this 
place  of  scripture  ;  and  have  from  thence  introduced  the 
absurd  doctrine  of  transubstantiation,  that  after  the  words  of 
consecration,  the  bread  and  wine  are  the  real  body  and  blood 
of  Christ.  So  some  adhere  only  to  the  letter  of  ihe  word 
,md  expound  the  law  of  God  in  a  mere  literal  sense.  It  seems 
the  apostle  Paul,  before  his  conversion,  understood  it  so. — 
Head  the  7th  chapter  of  Romans,  from  the  6th  to  the  end  of 
the  13th  verse.  Paul  was  brought  up  at  the  feet  of  Gama- 
liel, a  doctor  of  the  law  ;  yet,  while  in  his  unregenerate  state, 
knew  not  the  spiritual  meaning  of  the  law  of  God,  (I  mean 
the  holy  or  moral  law)  and  no  doubt  he  spake  by  experience 
when  he  says,  (as  I  wrote  to  you  from  1  Cor.,  ii.  L4)  "  But 
the  natural  man  received  not  the  things  of  the  spirit  of  God, 
for  they  are  foolishness  unto  him,  neither  can  he  know  them, 
because  they  are  spiritually  discerned."  By  the.  natural 
man,  I  conceive,  the  apostle  meant  the  unregenerate  man: 
yea,  with  the  highest  degree  of  human  teaching  and  knowl- 
edge without  he  is  taught  of  God,  by  his  word  and  spirit,  he 
cannot  truly  understand  the  things  of  the  spiri/  of  God  ;  and 
iherefore  they  are,  as  I  say,  misapplied,  mangled  and  made 
havoc  of.  Faith  is,  by  some,  only  held  as  a  bare  assent  that 
Jesus  Christ  came  in  the  flesh.  None  do  truly  believe  that, 
but  by  the  Holy  Ghost. 

You  still  will  continue  to  maintain  the  doctrine  of  Univer- 
sal Salvation,  by  those  texts,  which  I  said  you  spake  at  the 
grave  with  such  an  emphasis  ;  if  they  are  to  be  understood 
only  in  a  literal  sense  as  they  are  expressed,  I  can  quote  as 
many  or  more  spoken  by  Christ  and  his  apostles  which  will 
contradict  them  in  their  literal  sense  :  Christ  says,  "  He  that 
believeth  and  is  baptised  shall  be  saved ;  but  he  that  be- 
lieveth  not  shall  be  damned.  Then  shall  he  say  unto  them 
on  his  left  hand,  depart  from  me  ye  cursed  into  everlasting 
fire,  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his  angels.     And  these  shall 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  23  I 

go  away  into  everlasting1  punishment ;  but  the  righteous  into 
life  eternal.  Then  said  Jesus  again  unto  them,  1  go  my  way, 
and  ye  shall  seek  me  and  shall  die  in  your  sins  :  whither  1  go 
ye  cannot  come."  John  viii.  21,  24,  "  I  said  therefore  unto 
you  that  ye  shall  die  in  your  sins;  for  if  ye  believe  not  that 
I  am  he  ye  shall  die  in  your  sins.*"  With  respect '  that  text 
you  quote  from  John  xii.  32,  "  And  I,  if  I  be  lifted  up  from 
the  earth,  will  draw  all  men  unto  me.1"  It  is,  I  conceive, 
explained  by  Christ  himself  in  John  iii.  1 4,  1  5,  "  And  as  Mo- 
ses lifted  up  the  serpent  in  the  wilderness  even  so  must  the 
son  of  man  be  lifted  up;  that  whosoever  believeth  on  him 
should  not  perish,  but  have  everlasting  life."  By  Christ  be- 
ing lifted  on  the  cro*=s  the  way  of  salvation  is  to  be  preached 
to  all  men;  but  it  is  only  those  that  believe  who  will  not 
perish  and  have  eternal  life,  according  to  the  foregoing 
scriptures  1  have  quoted  from  Mark  xvi.  16,  and  Mat.  xxv. 
41,  16.  I  co;ild  quote  many  more  scriptures  spoken  by  our 
Lord  himself  and  explained  by  him  ;  and  I  hope,  sir,  you  will 
allow  our  Lord  lo  be  the  best  expositor  of  his  own  word.  I 
conceive  you  think  you  have  got  a  mighty  argument  wht :; 
you  mention  the  apostle  Peter,  who  had  a  vision  which  in 
structed  him  in  his  duty  to  preach  the  gospel  to  the  Gentiles  ; 
but  remember,  Peter  says,  u  I  perceive  that  God  is  no  re- 
specter of  persons  :  but  in  every  nation,  he  that  feareth  God 
and  worketh  righteousness,  is  accepted  of  him."  Then  he 
began  to  preach  the  gospel  to  Cornelius  and  his  friends;  he 
preached  Christ  to  them  ;  he  preached  Jesus  and  the  resur- 
rection ;  he  shows  he  is  ordained  of  God  to  be  the  Judge  of 
the  quick  and  the  dead  ;  and  says,  "  To  him  give  all  the 
prophets  witness  that  through  his  name  whosoever  believeth 
in  him  shall  receive  remission  of  sins."  Did  he  say  that 
every  individual  of  the  human  race  would  be  saved?  No 
such  thing  !  And  though  he  had  further  light  concerning 
the  Gentiles,  he  never,  as  1  can  find,  preached  Universal  Sal- 
vation, but  to  the  contrary.  Read  his  epistles,  first  and  sec- 
ond, particularly  2d  epistle,  2d  chapter  from  1st  to  the  end 
of  the  9th  verse.  "  The  Lord  knoweth  how  to  deliver  the 
godly  out  of  temptation;  and  to  reserve  the  unjust  to  the 
day  of  judgment,  to  be  punished  ;"  notto  be  liberated  !  Read 
3d  chapter,  7th  verse,  "  But  the  heavens  and  the  earth 
which  are  now,  by  the  same  word  are  kept  in  store  reserved 
unto  fire  agaiust  the  day  of  judgment  and  perdition  of  ungodh 
men."  Peter  wrote  these  epistles  after  he  had  further  light 
with  respect  to  the  Gentiles'  having  the  gospel  preached 
rtnto  them. 


232  series  or  letters: 

As  to  what  you  write  about  my  saying-  I  do  not  envy  you 
because  great  numbers  go  to  hear  you,  I  still  say  it,  as  far  as 
I  know  my  wicked  and  deceitful  heart,  and  wish  you  might 
preach  the  pure  and  simple  gospel,  and  that  your  hearers 
might  desire  nothing  more  than  ;he  sincere  milk  of  the  word, 
as  new-born  babes,  preached  unto  them  ;  that  they  might 
grow  thereby,  &c. 

That  place  I  directed  you  to  in  1  John,  iv.  5,  6,  and  wish- 
ed you  to  consider,  though  I  have  in  some  measure  already 
considered  it,  I  will  attempt  more  particular  to  consider  it. 
1st.  You  say,  John  says,  "And  every  spirit  that  confesseth 
not  that  Jesus  Christ  is  come  in  the  flesh,  is  not  of  God,  and 
this  is  that  spirit  of  Antichrist  whereof  you  have  heard  it 
should  come  and  even  now  already  is  in  the  world."  John 
in  the  preceding  verse  said,  that  every  spirit  that  confesseth 
rssus  Christ  is  come  in  the  flesh,  is  of  God  ;  do  you  think,  sir, 
{ bat  every  person  that  assenis  to  this  truth  is  a  true  believer  ? 
But  tew  that  have  been  born  in  a  land  of  gospel  light  but 
what  assents  to  this  ;  but  the  soul  that  is  born  of  God  truly 
believes  it,  according  to  what  the  same  apostle  writes,  5th 
chapter  1st  epistle  1st  verse,  "  Whosoever  believeth  Jesus 
is  the  Christ  is  born  of  God,  and  every  one  that  loveth  him 
that  begat,  loveth  him  also  that  is  begotten  of  him."  Do  all 
men  that  confess  that  Jesus  Christ  is  come  in  the  flesh  pro- 
fess to  be  born  of  God  f  Do  they  love  the  children  of  God 
that  bear  his  image  ?  No  ;  they,  if  unregenerate,  are  of  the 
world,-  they  "  love  darkness  rather  than  light,  because  their 
deeds  are  evil."  Who  does  our  Lord  mean  when  he  says, 
;i  If  the  world  hate  you,  it  hated  me  before  it  hated  you,  if 
ye  were  of  the  world  the  world  would  love  his  own  ;  but  be- 
cause ye  are  not  of  the  world,  but  I  have  chosen  you  out  of 
the  world,  therefore  the  world  hateth  you  ?"  Sir,  you  know 
that  there  has  been  many  antichristian  professors  of  this 
truth,  that  Jesus  Christ  is  come  in  the  fleshy  that  have  shed 
much  human  blood,  because  they  hated  the  dear  children  of 
God.  Therefore  I  conceive  this  is  the  meaning  of  the  text ; 
we  must  know  for  ourselves  that  Jesus  Christ  is  the  Son  of 
God,  as  Peter  did  when  he  confessed  him,  and  Christ  said  to 
him,  "  Blessed  art  thou  Simon  Barjona,  for  flesh  and  blood 
has  not  revealed  this  unto  thee,  but  my  Father  which  is  in 
heaven — upon  this  rock  I  willJbuild  my  church,  and  the  gates 
of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it."  I  believe  that  true  and 
saving  faith  is  wrought  in  the  heart  by  the  spirit  of  the  living 
God  :  and  the  soul  that  believes  truly,  is5  as  I  have  already 


SERIES    OP    LETTERS.  233 

said,  born  of  God,  is  in  union  with  Christ ;  is  partaker  of  tr  e 
divine  nature  ;  and  has  escaped  the  corruption  that  is  in  the 
world  through  lust, and  is  pressing  forward  towards  the  mark 
for  the  prize  of  the  high  calling  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus.  I 
have  wrote  more  than  I  intended,  having  received  your 
other  epistle  and  have  considered  some  of  it.  This  remains 
to  be  considered  ;  what  you  wrote  concerning  your  having 
great  numbers  of  hearers.  It  is  true  Christ-had  a  great  num- 
ber which  followed,  and  heard  him,  but  few  which  followed, 
because  they  loved  his  doctrine,  and  followed  him  from  right 
motives.  He  said  unto  them,  u  Ye  seek  me  not  because  ye 
saw  the  miracles,  but  because  ye  did  eat  of  the  loaves  and 
were  filled.  Labour  not  for  the  meat  that  perisheth,  but 
for  the  meat  which  endureth  unto  everlasting  life,  which  the 
Son  of  man  shall  give  unto  you,  for  him  hatbGod  the  Father 
sealed,"  John  vi.  26,  27.  Our  Lord  says,  John  viii.  47,  "  He 
that  is  of  God  heareth  God's  words  :  ye  therefore  hear  them 
not  because  ye  are  not  of  God."  Hence  you  may  see  how 
our  Lord  and  his  beloved  disciple  John  agree  ;  it  is  not  the 
truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus,  the  populace  are  after  ;  it  is  to  gratify 
their  curiosity,  or  hear  something  about  their  salvation  in  a 
way  that  has  no  cross  in  it.  But  Christ  says,  "  If  any  man 
will  be  my  disciple  let  him  deny  himself  and  take  up  his 
cross,  and  fellow  me."  When  Christ  preached  soul  search- 
ing doctrine  as  he  did  in  the  6th  of  John,  "  Many  of  his  dis- 
ciples went  back  and  followed  no  more  with  him."  And  J 
believe  when  you  preach  repentance  and  faith,  and  shew 
what  fruits  they  will  produce  in  the  true  penitent  and  true 
believer,  the  world  will  not  hear  you  and  cordially  like  your 
doctrine.  But  they,  as  John  saysy  are  of  the  world,  therefore 
they  speak  of  the  world,  and  the  world  heareth  thern  ;  "  We 
are  of  God,  he  that  knoweth  God  heareth  us;  he  that  is  not 
of  God  heareth  not  us:  hereby  know  we  the  spirit  of  truth 
and  the  spirit  of  error."  I  have  reason  to  think  some  popu- 
lar preachers  are  good  men,  but  the  world  do  not  like  them 
nor  their  doctrine,  because  they  are  so  ;  but  because  of  their 
popularity  their  curiosity  is  fed,  or  gratified — and  not  their 
souls  with  the  pure  milk  of  the  word;  Sir,  you  answer  in 
some  way  which  is  ambiguous  to  me  about  your  preaching 
repentance,  and  say  repentance  may  be  preached  without 
speaking  the  word  repentance.  What  makes  yon  shun 
speaking  plainly  as  Christ  did  ?  Be  explicit  in  preaching  it. 
You  cannot  deny,  but  Christ  and  his  apostles  preached  it  ex- 
plicitly. Christ  said  in  plain  language,  "  Except  ye  repent 
2Q* 


234  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

ye  shall  all  likewise  perish,"  Luke  xiii.  3,  5.  In  your  an 
svver  concerning  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  you  do  not 
speak  of  that  in  a  clear  and  explicit  way,  and  your  not  men- 
tioning- it  at  either  of  the  funerals,  makes  me  doubt  whether 
you  believe  it  in  as  clear  and  literal  a  manner  as  it  is  ex- 
pressed in  the  scriptures  by  Christ  and  his  apostles.  Paul' 
says,  "  Seeing  we  have  such  hope  we  use  great  plainness  of 
speech.'1  I  hope,  sir,  you  will  not  be  offended  with  me  for 
plain  dealing. 

As  to  your  apostacy,  I  hope  I  shall  have  an  opportunity  to 
confer  with  you  about  it.  I  am  happy  to  say  I  feel  no  ran- 
cour or  enmity  against  your  person  or  people,  as  a  neighbour 
and  friend,  but  should  be  willing  to  assist  you  in,  and  as  far 
as  my  ability  and  power  with  a  good  conscience  will  admit ; 
and  hope  this  will  not  interrupt  our  meeting  together  as  us- 
ual in  visiting  the  schools.  I  think  we  had  best  drop  the  con- 
troversj',  and  I  think  I  shall  no  more  write  to  you,  and  hope 
you  will  no  more  write  to  me  on  this  subject.  You  may 
make  what  use  you  please  of  it ;  I  hope  it  will  be  made  of 
good  use  to  you. 

I  now,  dear  sir,  "commend  you  to  God  and  the  word  of 
his  grace,  which  is  able  to  build  you  up  in  the  truth  as  it  is  in 
Jesus,  and  give  you  an  inheritance  among  all  them  which  are 
sanctified." 

From  your  friend,  and  well  wisher  in  the  gospel  of  our 
dear  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  JOSEPH  WALTON 

Mr.  Hosea  ILllou,  Pastor  of  a  Church. 


LETTEPt  V. 

WROX   THE  REV.  HOSEA  BALLOU  TO  THE  REV.  JOSEPH  WALTON.. 

Portsmouth,  Jan-.  15,  1811. 

Rev.  Sir,— Yours  of  the  1 1th  inst.  is  before  me,  and  ac- 
cording to  my  promise  I  hasten  to  pay  an  early  attention  io  its 
contents,  notwithstanding  you  express  a  hope  that  I  should 
write  to  you  no  more  on  this  subject.  In  your  desire,  sir,  that 
1  should  write  no  more  I  believe  you  to  be  really  sincere,  for  I 
believe  you  to  be  a  man  disposed  to  give  your  friends  as  little 
trouble  as  possible  ;  but  I  have  several  reasons  for  answer- 
ing your  last,  which,  when  I  have  stated,  I  presume,  will 
fully  satisfy  you  that  my  answer  is  required  injustice  to  myself 

1st.  I  find  myself  accused  of  baseness,  of  which,  were  I 
guilty,  the  forfeiture  would  be  tfint  of  confidence 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  23.> 

2d.  I  find  my  preaching  misrepresented,  and  that  in  direct 
violation  of  my  own  declaration  in  the  present  correspon- 
dence. 

3d.  I  find  questions  proposed  for  my  discussion,  which  ren- 
ders it  reasonable  that  you  should  have  an  answer,  as  1  was  in 
hopes   of  obtaining  to  the  questions  which  I  staled  to  you. 

4th.  I  find  you  quite  off  from  the  subjects  of  your  admoni- 
tions, not  attempting  to  support  them,  nor  yet  willing-  to  ex- 
onerate me  from  charges. 

5th.  I  find  the  scriptures  of  our  blessed  Lord  and  Saviour 
quoted  with  a  manifest  design  to  limit  his  grace  and  salvation. 

I  might  go  on  and  state  a  number  more  reasons  why  I  con- 
ceive it  to  be  my  duty  to  reply,  but  the  five  already  given 
will  undoubtedly  satisfy  your  mind  ;  and  they  furnish  sub- 
jects sufficiently  ample  for  an  epistle.  To  them  I  shall  con- 
form myself,  and  endeavour  to  be  as  concise  as  is  consistent 
with  the  importance  of  the  subject. 

1st.  Your  accusation  is  in  the  following  words  : — 

'■  Here  you  designedly,  1  think,  mistake."  "  Those  texts 
of  scripture  which  you  have  quoted  from  Rom.  8th  chapt.  are 
not  to  be  applied  as  you  apply  them,  neither  doth  the  apos- 
tle apply  them  so.  And  methinks  you  know  they  are  not,  if 
you  consider  the  connexion  from  the  28th  verse  of  the  chap- 
ter to  the  end.  And  that  passage  of  scripture  quoted  from 
1  Cor.  iii.  21,  22,  23,  isonly  to  be  applied  to  real  christians  ; 
and  this,  sir,  I  presume  you  know  ;  but  it  would  not  suit  you 
and  your  scheme  of  Universal  Salvation  to  apply  them  so.*' 

Here  I  am  accused,  1st  of  designedly  mistaking  you  !  And, 
2d  of  a  wilful  misapplication  of  the  sacred  word!  To  these 
high  charges,  sir,  I  heg  the  privilege  of  pleading  not  guilty  ; 
and,  after  making  my  defence,  of  submitting  ray  cause"  to  im- 
partial judges. 

With  regard  to  the  designed  ?nistakeymy  defence  is  that  no 
mistake  was  made  by  me  either  designed  or  not  designed. — 
1  have  examined  and  find  that  I  quoted  you  verbatim.  I  also 
find  *bat  I  fully  agreed  with  you  in  the  sentence  quoted  as 
to  what  was  necessarily  signified  by  it.  I  applied  the  sen- 
tence according  to  my  own  mind  ;  hut  did  not  pretend  nor 
say  that  you  applied  it  as  I  did.  Where  then  is  the  designed 
mistake  ?  Could  an  action  lie  against  a  man  for  murder  if  no 
body  were  found,  on  which  murder  had  been  committed  ? — 
«.\>uid  an  indictment  for  theft  be  supported  against  a. man  if 
no  property  were  missing  from  the  owner  ?  Is  it  proper  to 
oring  an   allegation  thus,    without  pointing  out  some  sort  o£ 


^36  SERIES   OF    LETTERS- 

misiake  ?  I  will  not  be  so  uncharitable,  sir,  as  (o  suppose 
that  you  designed  to  bring  a  false  accusation  in  this  instance 
jVo,  sir,  you  are  not  capable  of  such  wickedness  ;  I  have 
pvcr  believed  you  to  be  an  honest,  sincere  christian  ;  and  that 
opinion  is  so  congenial  to  my- feelings  that  I  shall  never  give 
rt  up  while  I  can  find  a  reasonable  excuse  for  retaining  it.- 

My  opinion  is,  that  you,  finding  that  I  had  made  such  rea- 
dy use  of  your  sentence  apparently  to  my  own  advantage, 
thought  I  designed  to  mistake  you,  and  feeling  a  little  disa- 
greeably on  the  occasion,  did  not  look  minutely  to  see  if  you- 
had  rightly  apprehended  me,  or  not. 

With  regard  to  the  wilful  misapplication  of  the  sacred  word 
my  defence  is  to  be  made  from  the  sacred  text  itself.  In  this 
defence,  sir,  it  is  sufficient  if  I  give  you  reasons  which  in- 
duce me  to  apply  the  scripture  as  I  do.  It  is  not  necessary 
that  I  convince  you  or  any  body  else  that  my  application  is 
right,  for  we  are  all  liable  to  err.  What  I  shall  aim  at  is  to 
show  that  if  my  applications  are  not  correct  yet  I  am  not 
guilty  of  wilfully  misapplying  the  sacred  text.  1st.  Of  the 
passage  in  the  3th  of  Rom.  the  following  are  my  reasons  for 
a  general  application  of  that  ssripture  to  mankind. 

1st.  The  whole  human  family,  at  least,  is  made  the  pri- 
mary subject  of  the  apostle's  application  as  may  be  seen  by 
looking  at  the  19th  verse  and  onward.  "  For  the  earnest 
expectation  of  the  creature  waiteth  for  the  manifestation  of 
the  sons  of  God.  For  the  creature  was  made  subject  to 
vanity,  not  willingly,  but  by  reason  of  him  who  subjected, 
the  same  in  hope  ;  because  the  creature  itself  also  shall  be 
delivered  from  the  bondage  of  corruption  into  the  glorious- 
liberty  of  the  children  of  God.  For  we  know  that  the 
whole  creation  groaneth  and  travaileth  in  pain  together  until 
now  ;  and  not  only  they,  but  ourselves  also,  which  have  the 
first  fruits  of  the  spirit,  even  we  ourselves  groan  within  our- 
selves, waiting  for  the  adoption,  to  wit,  the  redemption  of 
our  body." 

I  understand  by  the  above  quotation  that  St.  Paul  meant 
the  same  by  the  "  whole  creation''''  as  he  did  by  the  u  creature" 
who  was  "  made  subject  to  vanity,  not  willingly,  but  by  rea- 
son of  him  who  hath  subjected  the  same  in  hope."  And 
this  creature  which  he  calls  the  u  whole  creation"  he  says 
shall  be  delivered  from  the  bondage  of  corruption  into  the 
glorious  liberty  of  the  children  of  God.  This  is  the  apos- 
tle's primary  application  of  the  love  and  mercy  of  God.  In 
Mftiinor  sense  he  i$  particular  as  may  be  seen  in  the   above 


3ERIES    OF    LETTERS.  23? 

quotation,  "  and  not  only  they,11  that  is  the  whole  creation 
at  large,  but  ourselves  also,  which  have  the  first  fruits  of 
the  spirit^  even  we  ours  Ives  groan  within  ourseivr-^.  waiting 
for  the  adoption,  to  wit,  the  redemption  of  our  body."  f 
know  of  no  way  to  understand  the  apostle  here  to  mean  oth- 
erwise than  that  the  whole  human  race  groan  and  travail  for 
the  same  deliverance  and  redemption  that  those  do  who 
are  blessed  wiih  the  first  fruits  of  the  spirit.  Nop  do  I  find 
any  expression,  in  relation  to  this  subject,  more  significant  of 
the  deliverance  of  those  who  have  the  first  fruits  of  the 
spirit,  than  of  the  deliverance  of  the  whole  creation,  or 
creature  made  subject  to  vanity.  By  turning  back  only  to  the 
5th  chap,  we  find  the  apostle  laboring  the  subject  of  grace 
and  salvation  in  just  as  extensive  a  manner.  Sec  verse  lGth7 
*;  Therefore  as  by  the  offence  of  one,  judgment  came  upon 
all  men  unto  condemnation,  even  so,  by  the  righteousness  of 
one,  the  free  gift  came  upon  all  nun  unto  justification  of  life ." 
Consistently  with  this  positive  and  particular  declaration  of 
the  apostle's  belief  in  the  justification  of  all  men  through 
the  righteousness  of  Jesus  Christ,  we  find  hi6-  following  testi- 
mony. See  1  Tim.  ii.  4,  &c.  "  Who  will  have  all  men  to 
he  saved  and  come  unto  the  knowledge  of  the  truth.  For 
there  is  one  God  and  one  mediator  between  God  and  men, 
the  man  Christ  Jesus  ;  who  gave  himself  a  ransom  for  all  to 
be  testified  indue  time.11  Heb.  ii.  9.  "  But  we  see  Jesus  who 
was  made  a  little  lower  than  the  angels  for  the  suffering  of 
death,  crowned  with  glory  and  honor  ;  that  he  by  the  grace 
of  God  should  taste  death  for  every  man.11  Rom.  iv.  25. — 
u  who  was  delivered  for  our  offences  and  was  raised  again 
for  our  justification.'1  v.  8.  u  But  God  commendeth  his 
love  toward  us,  in  that,  while  we  were  yet  sinners,  Christ 
died  for  us.''1 

fa  the  above  testimony  the  apostle  says,  that  Christ  gavrr 
himself  a  ransom  for  all  men,  that  he,  by  the  grace  of  God, 
tasted  death  for  every  man,  that  he  was  delivered  for  our  of- 
fences and  was  raised  again  for  our  justification,that  his  death 
lor  sinners  is  a  commendation  of  God's  love  to  them.  Now  L 
am  willing  to  acknowledge  to  you,  sir,  and  to  all  the  world, 
that  I  can  make  no  sense  of  the  above  testimony  without 
applying  it  to  all  mankind.  In  the  apostle^  observations  in 
the  close  of  the  8th  of  Rom.  of  nothing  being  able  to  sepa- 
rate us  from  the  love  of  God,  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus,  there 
is  a  perfect  analogy  with  the  foregoing  testimony.  The 
love  of  God  which  is  in.  Christ  Jesus,  was  commended  to  a 


3o8  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

sinful  world  in  that  Christ  tasted  death,  by  the  grace  of  Gbd^ 
for  every  man.     If  one  of  all  those   for  whom  Christ  died 
can  be  separated  from  that  love    by  which  Christ  died  for 
him,   I  know  not   why  the  whole  may  not  be,  by  the  same 
argument. 

2d.  Of  the  passage  in  1st  Cor.  3d,  &c.  This  passage, 
you  say,  you  presume  I  know  ought  not  to  be  applied  to  any 
but  real  christians  !  See  the  text.  "Therefore  let  no  man. 
glory  in  men;  for  all  things  are  yours  ;  whether  Paul,  or 
Apollos,  or  Cephas,  or  the  world,,  or  life,  or  death,  or  things 
present,  or  tilings  to  come  ;  all  are  yours  ;-  and  ye  are 
Christ's  ;  and  Christ  is  God's."  Are  you  willing,  sir,  to  pre- 
sume that  I  knew  that  the  apostle  Paul  did  not  me:ri  to  dis- 
suade any  but  real  christians  from  trusting  in  men  ?  This 
}'ou  must  presume  in  order  tc  presume  that  I  know  the  text 
ought  to  be  applied  to  none  but  real  christians,  is  not  the 
sense  of  **  no  man*'  as  universal  in  the  negative,  as  the  sense 
of  "  oilmen'''  is  in  the  positive  ?  Why  did  you  not  attempt 
to  give  some  reason  for  such  a  presumption  ?  I  hope  dear 
sir,  you  will  not  allow  yourself  to  think,  even  for  one  mo- 
ment, that  I  am  so  uncharitable  as  to  suppose  you  presumed 
thus,  contrary  to  impressions  ufytnit  Own  mind,  though  you 
cannot  think  any  worse  of  me  than  is  implied  in  thn  pre- 
sumption. I  tell  you,  sir,  that  I  seriously  believe  that  the 
above  text  ought  to  be  applied  10  all  men  ;  I  believe  it  is 
wrong  for  any  man  to  put  his  trust  in  man,  according  to  that 
scripture  ;  and  I  believe  it  to  be  perfectly  right  to  exhort 
all  men  to  put  their  trust  in  God  who  has  given  his  son  to  die 
for  us  all,  and  who  will  with  him  freely  give  us  all  things 
richly  to  enjoy. 

I  do  not  doubt  your  sincerity  in  the  above  presumption, 
but  I  doubt  your  having  paid  a  suitable  attention  to  the  sub- 
ject before  you  thus  presumed.  Hasty  judgments  and  sud- 
den conclusions  frequently  make  work  for  repentance  ;  but 
the  true  christian  will,  on  cool  reflection,  be  willing  to  ac- 
knowledge his  faults  and  to  remove  unjust  accusations. — 
"  By  their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them/'  On  considering 
the  usage  with  which  I  meet  in  this  unsolicited  and  un- 
expected correspondence,  1  cannot  but  call  to  mind  the  very 
different  treatment  which  the  devil  received  from  an  heav- 
enly dignitary,  who  dared  not  to  bring  against  his  opponent 
a  raihn^  accusation!  As  a  further  evidence  that  the  text  in 
Corinthians  ought  to  be  applied  to  all  men,  or  to  men  in 
general,  see  the  words  of  the  same  appostle  to  the  Ephesi- 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  23V 

-ans,  chapter  iv.  8,  1 1,  &c.  "  Wherefore  he  saitb,  when  he 
ascended  up  on  high,  he  led  captivity  captive,  and  gave  gifts 
unto-  men.  And  he  gave  some  apostles  ;  and  some  prophets  ; 
and  some  evangelists  ;  and  some  pastors  and  teachers."" — 
*Vow  look  again  to  the  passage  in  Corinthians,  "  For  all 
things  are  yours,  whether  Pm</,  or  Apollos,  or  Cephas,*' 
fee.  These  were  the  gifts  given  unto  men.  The  question 
now  is,  were  those  gifts  which  were  given  unto  men,  given 
to  any  but  real  christians  ?  See  Pslam  lxviii.  18,  to  which 
the  apostle  alludes  in  his  words  quoted  from  Eph.  iv.  "  Thou 
hast  ascended  on  high  ;  thou  hast  led  captivity  captive  ; 
thou  hast  received  gifts  for  men  ;  yea,  for  the  rebellious  al- 
so, that  the  Lord  God  might  dwell  among  them."  Are  you 
willing,  sir,  to  presume  that  I  knozv  that  the  prcphet  David 
aud  St.  Paul  meant  to  apply  those  scriptures  to  none  hue 
real  christians  ?  1  must  aknowledge  my  suprise  at  such  pre- 
sumption. I  will  now  take  my  leave  of  those  accusations, 
just  remarking  that  I  feel  no  fear  in  submitting  my  case  to 
any  impartial  tribunal. 

The. 2d  general  particular  is  that  of  my  preaching  being 
misrepresented,  and  that  in  direct  violation  of  mv  own  de- 
clarations in  the  present  correspondence.  This  misrepre- 
sentation 1  find  in  your  letter  in  tho  following  .words  :  "  I 
think,  sir,  your  giving  your  hearers  encouragement  in  your 
preaching  that  Christ  will  save  them  all  whether  they  re- 
pent and  believe  the  gospel  or  no,  is  of  a  dangerous  nature. " 
In  the  first  place  I  call  my  whole  congregation  to  witness 
against  this  misrepresentation.  In  tbe  second  place  I  call  my 
own  testimony  in  this  correspondence  which  you  had  before 
you,  to  witness  against  this  misrepresentation.  The  fallow- 
ing are  my  own  words  verbatim  : — u  In  the  first  place  I  wish 
to  observe  that  1  as  much  believe  in  those  scriptures  which 
speak  of  the  necessity  of  repentance,  as  1  do  in  any  part  of 
the  sacred  writings.  The  many  scriptures  which  you  have 
judiciously  quoted  to  pro\e  the  propriety  of  the  doctrine  of 
repentance  are  justly  applied  as  !  conceive,  and  I  accord 
with  you  in  their  use  and  meaning  as  far  as  you  have  explain- 
ed them.  While  a  man  is  in  a  state  of  unbelief  he  is  not  in 
the  enjoyment  of  th*  truth."  These  quotations,  sir,  are  all 
in  direct  opposition  to  ycux  representation  of  the  subject  of 
repentance. 

Here  again  I  ought  to  observe,  that  I  am  far  from  accus- 
ing you  of  an  intentional  fcvlt,  or  a  wilful  misrepresentation  ; 
though  in  order  to  su^ppobd  you  clear  from  such  a  fault,  1  must 


210  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

charitably  suppose  that  the  perturbations  of  your  mind  were 
such  that  you  did  not  give  my  letter  a  careful  examination. 
I  proved  by  plain  and  positive  scripture  that  repentance  is  as 
much  a  gift  of  Christ  as  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  which  is, 
with  the  parage  quoted  from  my  letter,  sufficient  to  convince 
any  man,  who  is  not  "  improperly  biassed  by  tradition,"  that 
I  do  not  exxlude  the  necessity  of  repentance. 

3d.  I  find  questions  proposed  for  my  discussion,  which  ren- 
ders it  necessary  that  you  should  receive  an  answer,  as  I  was 
in  hope  of  obtaining  to  the  questions  which  I  stated  to  you. 

These  questions  are  in  the  following  words:  "  I  would 
ask  you.  if,  when  1  am  writing  a  letter  or  an  .epistle  to  Mr. 
Hosea  Ballon,  it  would  be  proper  for  me  to  apply  what  I 
wrote  in  particular  to  }'ou  concerning }'our  affairs,  or  circum- 
stances, to  the  whole  world  ?  Who  does  our  Lord  mean 
when  he  says,  ;  If  the  world  hate  yon  it  hated  me  before  it 
hated  you,'  &c."  To  the  first  of  these  questions  I  answer, 
should  you  state  in  a  letter  to  me  that  no  man  ought  to  preach 
the  doctrine  which  I  preach.  I  should  suppose  that  your  ob- 
servation would  apply  to  the  whole  world  of  mankind  as 
well  as  to  me  ;  or  if  I  should  say  in  a  letter  to  the  Rev.  Jos- 
eph Walton,  no  man  ought  to  presume  his  friend  to  be  guilty 
of  -jviljul  mistakes,  and  misapplications  of  scripture  without  the 
best  possible  evidence,  I  believe  you  would  see  the  propriety 
of  applying  my  observation  to  all  men,  even  if  you  should 
feel  yourself  particularly  admonished  by  it. 

The  second  question  I  conceive  may  be  justly  answered 
thus  :  The  world  which  hated  Christ  was  that  religious  order 
among  the  Jews  who  accused  him  of  being  a  friend  to  publi- 
cans and  sinners  ;  who  thought  themselves  so  much  better 
than  their  neighbours,  as  to  say,  "  Stand  by  thyself,  come 
not  nigh  me,  for  I  am  holier  than  thou." 

Enmity  to  Christ  grows  out  of  a  Pharisaical  notion  of  our 
own  righteousness,  and  it  is  an  invariable  mark  of  a  Pharisee 
to  oppose  the  humiliating  doctrine  of  equal  guilt  and  equal 
grace.  No  man  ever  hated  Christ  who  felt  the  weight  of 
his  own  sins  and  the  need  of  a  Saviour.  No  set  of  men  ever 
fomented  persecutions  but  such  as  thought  themselves  the 
more  particalar  favourites  of  God  than  others. 

When  I  hear  certain  characters  raising  such  queries,  I  am 
almost  induced  to  use  the  freedom  with  them  which  the  pro- 
phet Nathan  used  with  his  terrible  majesty  the  king,  and 
say,  "  Thou  art  the  man  !"  Bur  I  dare  not  assume  the  place 
-of  judgment ;  and  I  know  my  own  fallibility  so  well  that  I 
have  no  need  to  accuse  others. 


sLRIES    OF    LETTERS.  24) 

4thly.  I  find  you  quite  off  from  the  subjects  of  your  admo- 
nition, not  attempting  to  support  them,  nor  yet  willing  to  ex- 
honerate  me  from  charges.  Quite  off,  I  say,  from  the  subjects 
of  admonition  ;  for  you  have  not  attempted  to  distinguish 
between  the  two  ideas  contained  in  what  you  stated  as  the 
first  subject  of  admonition,  nor  have  you  told  me  whether  it 
be  one,  or  both  which  you  consider  thus  reprehensible. — 
You  labour  some  time  on  another  subject  which  concerns  the 
mode   by   which   death  was  introduced,  but  you  have  said 
nothing  about  whether  God  originally  designed  death,  or  not. 
Not  knowing  your  real  mind  from  what  you  expressed  on  this 
subject,  I  queried  in  my  mind  how  I  ought  to  understand  you, 
and  supposeing  you  consistent  with  yourself,  and  having  suffi- 
cient reason  to  believe  that  your  creed  contains  the  belief 
that  God  foreordained  whatsoever  comes  to  pass,  I  explained 
the  sentence  accordingly  ;  but  you  neither  acknowledge  me 
right  in  this  particular,  nor  object;  but  you  say  that  you  do 
not  think  you  ever  told  me  so  !     Here  again,  sir,  I  can  easily 
suppose  you  speak  the  truth,  though  I  am  under  the  necessi- 
ty of  charitably  supposing  that  your  memory  fails,  for  at  the 
first  visit  which  I  had  the  happiness  of  making  you,  I  heard 
you  recommend  the  Catechism  to  be  taught  in  schools  which 
contains   this  very  article   of  faith.     And  now,  sir,  I  must 
either  believe  that  you  would  recommend  that  which  you  do 
not  believe,  or  I  must  still  suppose  that  you  believe  that  God 
foreordained  whatsoever  comes  to  pass  ;  and  of  course  that 
he  foreordained  death.  And  as  you  admonish  me  for  suggesting 
that  God  originally  designed  death  for  the  good  of  mankind 
you  cannot  be  consistent  with  yourself,  as  I  can  see,  without 
believing  that  God  originally  designed  death  for  a  damage  to 
mankind.     And  as  you  do  not  deny  believing  thus,  I  cannot 
but  marvel  that  you  should  wholly  neglect  to  answer  my 
queries  on  this  subject :  a  subject  which  evidently  involves 
the  moral  character  of  God.     Do  you  feel,  sir,  as  if  you  had 
honourably  acquitted  yourself  in  this  particular,  by  only  ex- 
ulting in  your  forgetfulness  concerning  having  given  me  to 
understand  your  creed  ?     Does  this  look  altogether  like  re- 
nouncing the  hidden  things  of  dishonesty  ?     Did  you  believe 
your  creed  in  respect  to  the  subject  of  admonition  was  hid 
from  me  ?     Why  then  did  you  not  openly  decide  either  one 
way  or  the  other  ?     May  I  not  without  doing  you  the  least 
injustice  suppose  you   were  straightened  by  the  glaring  in- 
consistency of  your  admonition  ?     If  you  avowed  the  sug- 
gested item  all  the  abominable  absurdity  which  I  posted  full 
21 


242  -SERIES   OF    LETTERS. 

in  sight  must  have  been  charged  to  your  account.  If  you 
disavowed  the  suggested  item  then  away  went  the  darling 
Catechism,  in  a  moment,  and  with  it,  more  of  the  preposter- 
ous inventions  of  priestcraft  than  could  be  easily  replaced  to 
the  advantage  of  the  cause  of  superstition  and  ignorance  !  I 
would  by  no  means  suggest  that  you  did  any  thing  or  neglect- 
ed to  do  any  thing  from  a  motive  which  your  own  conscience 
disallowed;  but  I  am  impelled,  even  by  charity  itself,  to  at- 
tribute your  conduct  in  the  above  case 'to  an  improper  pre- 
judice against  a  doctrine  of  winch  you  know  but  very  little. 

Another  subject  of  your  admonition  is  that  of  my  having 
apostatised  from  the  true  faith.  On  this  subject,  on  which 
I  was  particular,  you  make  no  defence,  nor  yet  exhonerate 
me  from  the  charge.  You  observe  you  hope  for  an  oppor- 
tunity to  confer  with  me  about  this  matter.  Why  were  you 
unwilling  to  write  your  defence  of  this  allegation,  or  be  so 
kind  as  to  withdraw  it.  I  must  use  the  plainness,  sir,  to  say, 
if  you  accuse  of  designed  mistakes  in  writing  where  no  mis- 
takes exist,  if  I  have  a  verbal  conference  with  you  on  these 
matters,  I  should  wish  to  have  it  before  a  ready  scribe  who 
coui'i  produce  the  conservation  afterwards.  You  are  not  to 
suppose  by  this  precaution  I  mean  to  intimate  that  you  would 
report  the  conversation  contrary  to  truth,  designedly  ;  I  mean 
if  when  ray  letters  are  before  your  eyes,  you  misunderstand, 
you  might  be  as  likely  to  misunderstand  conversation. 

You  admonished  me  for  preaching  a  doctrine  which  pleases 
the  world,  meaning  the  populace  ;  and  I  endeavoured  to  de- 
fend myself  in  that  particular:  but  you  neither  attempt  to 
show  my  reasoning  faulty,  nor  yet,  acknowledge  me  correct. 
This  is  admonishing,  I  should  suppose,  in  the  unaccountable 
manner  in  which  Popes  admonish  !  You  say  that  many  fol- 
lowed Christ  for  the  sake  of  the  loaves.  Dear  sir,  1  did  not 
say  but  they  all  did;  and  if  they  did,  the  question  is,  does 
that  prove  his  doctrine  not  of  God  ?  Here,  sir,  you  will  see, 
if  you  look  one  moment,  that  you  were  off,  far  off  from  the 
subject. 

5th  I  find  the  scriptures  of  our  blessed  Lord  and  Saviour 
quoted  with  a  manifest  design  to  limit  his  grace  and  salvation. 

You  introduce  those  quotations  as  follows  :  u  You  still  will 
continue  to  maintain  the  doctrine  of  Universal  Salvation  by 
those  texts  which  I  said  you  spoke  at  the  grave  with  such  an 
emphasis.  If  they  are  to  be  understood  only  in  a  literal  sense 
as  they  are  expressed,  I  can  quote  as  many,  or  mere  spoken 
by  Christ  and  his  apostles,  which  will  contradict  them  ia 


SERIES   OF   LETTERS.  243 

their  literai  sense.  Christ  says,  4  He  that  believeth  and  is 
baptised  shall  be  saved,  but  he  that  believeth  not  shall  be 
damned.  Then  shall  he  say  unto  them  on  his  left  hand 
depart  from  me  ye  cursed  into  everlasting  fire  prepared  for 
the  devil  and  his  angels.  And  these  shall  go  away  into  ever- 
lasting punishment,  but  the  righteous  into  life  eternal.' — 
1  Then  said  Jesus  again  unto  them,  1  go  my  way  and  ve  shall 
seek  me  and  shall  die  in  your  sins;  whither  I  go  ye  cannot 
come.  John  viii.  21,  24.  I  said  therefore  unto  you  that  ye 
shall  die  in  your  sins,  for  if  ye  believe  not  1  am  he  ye  shall 
die  in  your  sins.'  " 

These  passages  you  say  contradict  those  which  I  make  use 
of  to  prove  Universal  Salvation,  if  we  understand  those  which 
I  thus  use  in  a  literal  sense,  as  they  are  expressed.  I  will 
state  one  passage  only  as  an  example,  which  1  have  before 
quoted.  Rom.  v.  18,  "  Therefore,  as  by  the  offence  of  one, 
judgment  came  upon  all  men  unto  condemnation,  even  so  ly 
the  righteousness  of  one  the  free  gift  came  upon  all  men 
unto  justification  of  life/'  Nothing  can  be  said  on  the  above 
text  which  can  tend  to  make  its  meaning  more  plain  than  it 
is,  if  its  most  natural  sense  be  the  true  sense.  This,  sir,  I 
presume,  you  will  allow  :  Now  let  us  look  for  a  contradic- 
tion of  this  text  in  the  passages  which  you  quoted.  "  He 
that  believeth  and  is  baptised  shall  be  saved,  and  he  that  be- 
lieveth not  shall  be  damned."  I  ask  how  long  the  unbeliev- 
er will  be  damned  ?  Answer — As  long  as  he  is  an  unbeliever, 
and  no  longer,  according  to  the  text.  Is  there  any  expres- 
sion in  the  text,  or  context  that  even  intimates  that  any  will 
remain  eternally  in  unbelief?  No.  Where  is  the  contradic- 
tion then?  There  is  none.  The  passage  which  you  quote 
from  the  25th  of  Mat.  says,  "  And  these  shall  go  away  into 
everlasting  punishment,  but  the  righteous  into  life  eternal/* 
As  the  word  everlasting  is  very  frequently  used  in  the  scrip- 
tures to  signify  ages  and  dispensations,  is  there  any  certainty 
that  it  has  not  such  a  meaning  in  this  place  ?  Answer  :  No. 
Where  is  the  contradiction  then  ?  There  is  none.  The  very 
expression  "punishment'*  shows  plainly  that  what  is  inflicted 
is  designed  as  an  emendation  of  the  punished.  I  have  shown 
in  a  late  publication,*  that  it  is  in  direct  violation  of  the 
words  of  Christ  to  explain  the  above  text  tosiguify  a  punish- 
ment in  another  state  of  existence  ;  and  yet^  if  we  were  un- 
der the  necessity  of  understanding  it  so,  it  would  fall  after 

•  u  Candid  Review.1'  or  Answer  to  Robinson. 


244  SERIES    OF    LETTERS. 

all  infinitely  short  of  proving  that,  at  some  period  known  to 
a  merciful  God,  all  men  will  not  be  justified  unto  life. — 
Therefore  no  contradiction  can  be  found.  The  passage 
which  speaks  of  those  who  should  die  in  their  sins  will  fall 
equally  short  of  contradicting  the  testimony  of  Universal  Jus- 
tification. I  will  ask  in  the  first  place,  whether  a  man's  be- 
ing dead  in  sin  render  it  impossible  for  him  to  be  quickened 
unto  life  by  the  spirit  of  God  ?  See  a  passage  which  you 
quote,  M  You  hath  he  quickened  who  were  dead  in  trespasses 
and  sins."  If  those  who  are  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins  can 
be  quickened  according  to  this  passage,  what  is  the  reason 
that  those  Jews  to  whom  Christ  spake  can  never  be  quicken- 
ed? You  must  see,  sir,  that  the  passage  which  you  quote 
refutes  your  notion  about  this  contradiction.  You  will  say 
that  Christ  told  the  Jews  u  whither  I  go  ye  cannot  come," 
but  you  cannot  but  remember  that  he  said  the  same  thing  to 
bis  own  disciples.  "  As  L  said  unto  the  Jews  so  I  say  unto 
you,  whither  I  go  ye  cannot  come  ;"  and  afterwards  explains 
himself  to  mean  that  they  could  not  come  immediately. — 
Let  us  now  turn  this  subject  round  and  ask  how  the  text 
quoted  from  Romans  can  be  true  if  your  notion  of  endless 
misery  be  granted  to  be  the  true  meaning  of  the  passages 
you  quote  ?  Will  you  undertake  to  say  that  men  who  are 
justified  unto  life  by  the  righteousness  of  Christ  will  remain 
endlessly  in  a  state  of  death  and  condemnation  ?  If  you  do 
uot  feel  competent  to  the  task  of  maintaining  such  palpable 
contradiction  why  would  it  not  be  doing  yourself  a  kindness 
just  to  examine  that  soul  chilling  and  heaven  dishonouring  doc- 
trine of  endless,  unmerciful  punishment  !  One  moment's  ex- 
amination of  such  an  idea  when  brought  in  sight  of  the  foun- 
tain which  is  opened  for  the  house  of  David  and  the  inhabi- 
tants of  Jerusalem  to  wash  in  from  sin  and  uncleanness  would 
abolish  it  forever.  I  acknowledge,  sir,  that  my  five  particu- 
lars do  not  comprehend  every  particular  of  your  letter;  nor 
have  I  attended  to  all  which  they  do  comprehend  so  exten- 
sively as  1  would  if  I  could  suppose  it  necessary;  but  as  you 
were  in  hopes  of  receiving  nothing,  it  is  not  to  be  expected 
that  you  will  find  fault  because  there  is  no  more. 

I  cannot  be  willing  to  close  this  epistle  without  giving  you 
credit  of  following  the  apostle's  direction  in  your  observa- 
tion concerning  my  argument  in  respect  to  St.  Peter.  You 
say  c;  1  conceive  you  think  you  have  got  a  mighty  argument," 
&c.  The  apostle  exhorts  us  to  be  children  in  malice,  and  1 
am   sure  St.  Paul,  nor  any  body  else  ever  heard  a  morr 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  215 

childish  expression  which  communicated  the  least  possible 
disaffection. 

What  you  quote  from  St.  Peter  with  a  design  to  prove  end- 
less misery,  without  attempting  to  show  that  such  was  his 
meaning,  I  forbear  commenting  upon.  If  you  had  shown  that 
Peter  could  consistently  believe  that  no  man  was  common  or 
unclean  considered  in  the  sheet  which  he  saw  in  vision,  and 
at  the  same  time  believe  that  the  greatest  part  of  mankind 
would  remain  in  sin  and  uncleanness  eternally  you  would  have 
done  more  than  you  have.  1  hope,  sir,  if  you  are  determined 
to  take  your  leave  of  this  correspondence  without  supporting 
the  subjects  of  your  admonition,  and  without  supporting  the 
heavy  charges  you  have  stated  against  me,  and,  likewise, 
without  acknowledging  the  impropriety  of  your  admonition, 
and  the  incorrectness  of  your  charges,  that  you  will  never  at- 
tack another  of  your  fellow  creatures  in  the  same  way.  I  do  not 
express  this  because  I  feel  the  least  unfriendliness  to  you  in 
consequence  of  the  method  you  have  pursued,  but  because  I 
think  it  is  contrary  to  the  spirit  of  Christianity  ;  it  is  not  doing 
as  we  wish  to  be  done  b}'.  I  do  not  believe  that  your  soul 
feels  satisfied  with  it;  but  you  have  some  remains  of  pride 
yet  which  keeps  you  from  giving  up  ground  which  you  are 
sensible  you  cannot  maintain.  I  hope,  sir,  you  will  entertain 
no  apprehensions  respecting  my  cordial  friendship  to  you,  or 
my  readiness  to  join  you  in  any  possible  usefulness  to  our  fel- 
low creatures.  And,  as  you  affectionately  committed  me  to 
God  and  to  the  word  of  his  grace,  please  to  accept  the  sincere 
desires  for  your  present  and  everlasting  welfare,  of  sir,  your 
humble  servant,  for  Christ's  sake.         HOSEA  BALLOU. 


LETTER  VI. 

i-rom  the  same  to  the  same. 

Portsmouth,  Feb.  1,  1811. 

Rev.  Sir, — Having  taken  into  serious  consideration  the 
whole  correspondence  which  has  passed  between  us,  I  have 
felt  very  deep  impressions  on  my  mind  arising  from  the  fol- 
lowing considerations* 

1st.  You  and  I  are  accountable  beings,  and  must  undoubt- 
edly, sooner  or  later,  be  called  to  account  for  the  propriety, 
or  impropriety  of  our  labours  with  each  other. 

21* 


"246  SERIES    OF    LETTERS, 

2d.  Ou* professional  character  must,  without  doubt,  be  «1 
high  consideration  in  our  accountability. 

3d.  The  eyes  of  society  are  ever  watchful,  and  God  has 
made  us  accountable,  not  only  to  himself,  but  to  our  fellow 
creatures,  who  have  a  just  demand  upon  us. 

While  these  important  considerations  were  revolving-  in  my 
mind,  I  felt  a  sense  of  my  youth,  compared  with  your  age,  my 
inexperience,  the  proneness  of  the  human  heart  to  the  vani- 
ty of  self  confidence,  the  bHndness  of  prejudice  to  which  old 
and  young'  are  more  or  less  subject,  and  also,  the  friendship 
which  has  hitherto  happily  subsisted  between  us  since  our 
first  acquaintance. 

These  circumstances  and  those  considerations,  led  my  mind 
to  the  conclusion  that  I  ought  to  lay  the  whole  matter  before 
<^od,  and  to  ask  of  him  suitable  wisdom  to  guide  me  in  rela- 
tion to  so  weighty  a  subject. 

The  result  of  ray  devotional  supplications  is  a  forcible  ap- 
plication of  the  divine  direction,  given  by  St.  Paul  1  Tim. 
v.  1,  "  Rebuke  not  an  elder  but  entreat  him  as  a  father,  and 
the  younger  men  as  brethren." 

How  far  your  communications  to  me  are  consistent,  or  in- 
consistent with  ihe  apostle's  direction,  in  the  above  text,  I  do 
not  conceive  it  my  duty  to  judge,  any  farther  than  a  discharge 
of  my  own  duty,  pursuant  to  the  apostle's  direction,  may  re- 
quire. On  the  most  deliberate  recapitulation  of  all  which  I 
have  written,  I  cannot  now  say,  that  I  could  wish  to  recal  a 
single  idea,  argument,  application  of  scripture,  or  sentiment ; 
though  I  will  not  even  suggest  that  better  information  might 
not  produce  a  different  conclusion.  I  trust  I  have  hitherto 
treated  you,  sir,  and  the  subjects  of  your  communications  with 
all  the  propriety  of  which  my  understanding  is  master;  and 
my  fervent  desire  is,  that  I  may  complete  the  labours  enjoin- 
ed on  me  by  the  above  text^  in  strict  conformity  to  that  most 
holy  spirit  which  inspired  such  excellent  counsel.  There- 
fore, Rev.  Sir,  1  entreat  you  as  a  father  to  consider, 

*  f.  Whether  you  entreated  your  humble  servant  as  a 
brother  when  you  admonished  him  for  important  particulars 
which  you  wholly  refuse  to  substantiate  either  as  facts  or 
wrongs  ? 

2^1.  Whether  you  entreated  me  as  a  brother  in  refusing  to 
decide,  as  to  your  meaning,  in  the  first  subject  of  your  admo- 
nition, and  in  not  giving  me  to  understand  whether  I  had 
rightly  apprehended  you  or  not  ? 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  247 

3d.  Whether  you  entreated  me  as  a  brother  in  not  acknowl- 
edging an  agreement  of  sentiment  on  the  subject  of  repent- 
ance after  I  had  given  you  the  fullest  assurance  possible,  that 
I  believed  in  its  necessity  and  importance  ? 

4th.  Whether  you  entreated  me  as  a  brother  in  admonish- 
ing me  as  an  apostate  from  the  true  faith  of  the  gospel,  while 
1  profess  to  believe  in  Christ  the  Son  of  God,  as  the  Savioui 
of  the  world  ;  and  stand  in  society,  in  my  various  relation, 
by  the  blessing  of  God,  unimpeached  as  to  morality  ? 

5th.  Whether  you  entreated  me  as  a  brother  in  admonish- 
ing me  against  a  doctrine  which  commends  the  love  and  mer- 
cy of  God  in  the  final  reconciliation  and  everlasting  happiness 
of  all  unreconciled  beings;  and  in  opposing  said  doctrine  with 
no  other  argument  than  saying,  in  effect,  that  if  the  scriptures 
which  prove  the  doctrine  are  allowed  to  mean  as  they  natu- 
rally read,  other  scriptures  contradict  them  !  Thus  furnishing 
the  inlklel  with  his  darling  weapon  against  the  divinity  of 
the  scriptures  ? 

6th.  Whether}Tou  entreated  me  as  a  brother  instatingthose 
heavy  charges  against  me,  in  which  you  accuse  mc  of  a  de- 
signed mistake,  and  of  ncilfal  misapplications  of  scriptures 
where  neither  mistake  or  misapplications  of  scriptures  ow*  be 
made  to  appear  ? 

7th.  Whether  you  entreated  me  as  a  brother  in  misrepre- 
senting my  preaching  when  you  never  heard  me  perform  in 
the  particular  capacity  of  a  preacher  ? 

8th.  Whether  you  entreated  me  as  a  brother  in  taking  your 
leave  of  this  correspondence  without  supporting  one  single 
particular  of  your  admonition,  or  one  single  charge  against  me. 
And  also,  without  acknowledging  the  incorrectness  of  your 
admonition,  or  the  impropriety  of  your  charges. 

I  entreat  you,  sir,  as  a  father,  to  consider  whether  the  spirit 
which  you  manifested,  in  bring  such  unreasonable  charges 
against  me,  be  consistent  with  the  directions  given  by  St.  Paul 
to  Timothy,  and  also  with  the  example  and  precept  of  him 
who  loved  his  enemies  and  commanded  his  disciples  to  do 
likewise  ? 

I  entreat  youseriouslv  to  consi(3er  what  the  conduct  of  the 
Saviour  would  have  been,  if  he  had  been  disposed  lo  judge, 
denounce,  inject  and  disfellowship  ali  those  who  sincerely  be- 
lieve in  him  and  strove  to  honour  him  wiih  becoming  obe- 
dience to  his  commands,  on  account  of  their  not  understand- 
ing  every  thing  as  well  as  he  did  ? 


248  SERIES   OF    LETTERS. 

I  entreat  you  to  call  in  question  your  treatment  of  me  be^ 
cause  I  do  not  believe  in  every  thing  as  you  do  ;  and  car- 
fully  examine  if  it  correspond  with  the  conduct  of  him,  who, 
out  of  pity  to  human  weakness,  submitted  himself  to  the 
scorn  and  hatred  of  those  who  considered  themselves  more 
righteous  than  others? ' 

In  relation  to  the  doctrine,  to  which  you  appear  so  vio- 
lently opposed,  I  entreat  you,  as  a  father,  to  take  into  consid- 
eration, 1st.  The  promises  of  God  to  Abraham  by  which  the 
doctrine  is  supported.  2dly.  The  corroborating-  testimonies 
in  the  JYew  Testament  by  which  we  are  to  understand  those 
promises.  3dly.  The  consistency  of  the  doctrine  with  the 
character  of  infinite  goodness.  And,  4thly.  The  consistency 
of  the  doctrine  with  every  benevolent  and  godlike  desire  of 
the  human  heart. 

If  God  promised  to  bless  all  the  families,  nations  and  kin- 
dreds of  the  earth  in  the  seed  of  Abraham,  who  is  Christ, 
and  if  St.  Paul  has  informed  us  that  this  blessing  is  justifica- 
tion through  faith.  I  entreat  you  to  consider  by  what  author- 
ity you  condemn  the  doctrine  of  Universal  Justification. 

If  the  apostle  has  also  argued  that  God  has  made  peace 
through  the  blood  of  the  cross  of  Jesus,  by  him  to  reconcile 
all  things  to  himself,  I  entreat  you  to  consider  by  what 
authority  you  condemn  the  doctrine  of  Universal  Reconcil- 
iation. 

If  in  perfect  conformity  10  the  promises  of  God,  the  pro- 
phet has  given  his  testimony  that  all  the  ends  of  the  earth 
shall  seethe  salvation  of  our  God.  I  entreat  you  to  consider 
by  what  authority  you  condemn  the  doctrine  of  Universal 
Salvation. 

If  you  make  use  of  scripture  to  contradict  such  plain  and 
positive  declarations,  by  explaining  parables  and  doubtful 
sayings  for  that  purpose,  I  entreat  you  candidly  to  consider 
whether  you  can  do  any  thing  more  to  the  dishonour  ot 
the  sacred  word,  or  more  pleasing  to  those  who  wish  to 
bring  the  scriptures  into  disrepute. 

Ifyou  feel  determined  to  maintain  and  inculcate  the  idea 
of  God's  punishing  his  rational  offspring  eternally  without 
mercy,  love,  or  pity  towards  them,  I  entreat  you,  as  a 
father,  to  consider  whether  you  can  invent  any  idea  which, 
applied  to  God,  would  make  his  character  appear  more 
contrary  to  the  spirit  of  him  who  loved  his  enemies  and  died 
for  them. 


SERIES    OF    LETTERS.  249 

I  entreat  you  to  examine  carefully  and  see  if  it  be  possi- 
ble to  reconcile  the  doctrine  of  endless  misery  with  the 
benevolent  desires  of  the  true  spiritual  children  of  God  ; 
and  consider  seriously  whether  it  be  proper  to  pray  for  the 
salvation  of  all  men,  and  then  condemn  the  belief  of  it  as  a 
heresy. 

I  entreat  you,  as  a  father,  to  call  into  serious  considera- 
tion the  real  cause  of  all  the  persecutions  and  abominable 
cruelties  which  have  been  practiced  in  Christendom,  on 
account  of  religion,  and  see  if  you  can  find  a  foundation  for 
these  things  except  in  the  blasphemous  notion  that  God  is 
unmerciful  towards  the  impenitent. 

Endeavour,  sir,  to  satisfy  yourself  how  the  foolish  preju- 
dices of  ignorant  zealots  could  ever  have  succeeded  in  estab- 
lishing so  many  middle  walls  of  partition,  and  in  making  so 
many  pernicious  distinctions  in  the  christian  world, if  the  blas- 
phemous notion  of  partiality  in  God  had  not  been  the  rage 
of  an  apostatised  church. 

Find  out,  if  you  can,  I  entreat  you,  sir,  the  cause  of  all 
the  madness  and  folly,  which  appear  in  the  habitual  cold- 
ness and  bitterness  exercised  by  the  clergy,  of  different  de- 
nominations towards  each  other,  if  it  be  not  the  blasphe- 
mous notion  that  their  foolish  prejudices  are  sanctioned  by 
God  ! 

Adieu,  I  write  no  more.  I  feel  that  I  have  done  my 
duty.  I  have  entreated  you  as  a  father  in  love  and  faithful- 
ness. I  leave  the  effects  with  God  ;  humbly  praying  and 
joyfully  believing,  that  when  we  are  purged  from  our  hay, 
wood  and  stubble,  with  the  spirit  of  judgment  and  the  spirit 
of  burning,  we  shall  see  eye  to  eye  and  be  admitted  to  a 
humble  seat  at  the  feet  of  our  blessed  Saviour,  for  whose 
sake  I  remain,  sir,  your  most  obedient  and  very  humble  ser- 
vant. HOSE  A  BALLOV 
Rev.  Joseph  Waltox. 


»* 


ittflfN%     '^-J^^^A 


Klfcw     '■■!»  w- 


J0    :}aL         *~"k 

Date  Due 

^k 

1 

t 

Form  335.     25M— 7-38— S 

+S&1 


/* 


289.1     B195S 
Ballou 


36808? 


Series  of  Letters  in  De- 
fence of  Divine  Revelation 

DATE  ISSUED  TO 


289.1     B193S 


368087 


\J»We 


;tv  Ub*^ 


x**y 


